Groups Defending Against Google Import Ban Aren't ‘Disinterested’ Parties, Says Sonos
Advocates for tech and for the disabled arguing against an International Trade Commission import ban on Google smart speakers (see 2001250004) aren't “disinterested” third parties, said Sonos (login required) in ITC docket 337-3428. “Most receive substantial funding from Google, which…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
was largely undisclosed in their submissions.” The public, including those with disabilities, “will not lose access to these features when the accused products are excluded,” Sonos said. Other vendors “can and will fill any void created by the absence of the infringing Google products,” it said. “Google itself could choose to provide non-infringing products.” The third-party submissions don't “argue that Google is the only supplier of devices that can be used by disabled people to control home functions,” said Sonos. It cited Statista estimating more than “a dozen other manufacturers of smart speakers” would be available.