The Venerable Wall Street Journal vs CNBC’s Josh Lipton: Lipton Loses and Is Hereby Placed on the Catherine Wheel

When I read this Bloomberg report I wanted to punch a hole through my wall. Earlier this morning, the 126 year institution, dubbed ‘The Wall Street Journal’, went head to head with some fucktard tech reporter on CNBC, dubbed ‘Josh Lipton.’

The WSJ reported that China had suspended the sale of the iPhone 6 because it was too similar to an existing Chinese phone, who had already stole IP from Apple. The stock was hit and everyone was pissed off. Then, some asshole from CNBC, threw cold water on the story, claiming that his ‘sources’, who are obviously nobody, said the story was bogus. CNBC spiked the story and everyone took to Twitter to talk shit about the venerable WSJ.

Lo and behold, once again, the Journal was right.

Beijing’s Intellectual Property Office said the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus infringe on patent rights held by the company Shenzhen Baili because of similarities to its 100C phone, according to its ruling Friday. China’s largest smartphone makers, by unit shipments, were Huawei Technologies Co., Oppo and Vivo in the first quarter, with Lenovo Group Ltd. and Xiaomi Corp. close behind, according to research firm International Data Corporation.

While the decision covers only Beijing, future lawsuits against Apple could take the case as a precedent, potentially influencing the outcomes of litigation elsewhere in China. Baili is one of scores of smartphone brands trying to cash in on the country’s mobile boom. Xu Guoxiang, the inventor who holds the patent and listed as a Baili representative on yellow-pages site czvv.com, did not answer calls seeking comment.

“IPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus as well as iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus and iPhone SE models are all available for sale today in China,” Apple spokeswoman Kristin Huguet said in an e-mailed statement. “We appealed an administrative order from a regional patent tribunal in Beijing last month and as a result the order has been stayed pending review by the Beijing IP Court.”

Tim Long, an analyst at BMO Capital Markets in New York, said he doesn’t think the Chinese ruling is meaningful for Apple.

“We believe there have been several prior cases against U.S. companies ruled in favor of local companies by lower courts that were later overturned by higher courts,” Long wrote in a note to clients. “We have seen dozens of court decisions banning different smartphone products over the years in many different countries. We are not aware of one ever that has resulted in an actual injunction.”

I promised to toss Lipton onto the Catherine Wheel in the city square if his story was bogus. That is exactly what I am about to do right now.

The post The Venerable Wall Street Journal vs CNBC’s Josh Lipton: Lipton Loses and Is Hereby Placed on the Catherine Wheel appeared first on Trading with The Fly.

Published at Trading with The Fly