Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 280 posts

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#111

Post by Freak_NL »

annnnd wrote: post #98
sirclueless wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One reason to be so nonchalant would be that the guy did in fact copy someone's patents wholesale, and was just waiting for the day someone would notice. If you know the lawsuit is unwinnable and not frivolous, no point complaining about it.

According to article this is not the case here: > “We weren’t infringing. But we couldn’t afford to fight the case,” he says. Instead, his company settled the 2015 claims with Acushnet by agreeing to get out of the golf-ball business altogether; it received no payment from Acushnet, nor did it pay.

That small business' response here is hard to fathom. Either the reporting is bad, or they quietly settled for a nice sum off the record (to prevent other businesses from getting ideas).

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#112

Post by gambiting »

grinich wrote: post #105
xienze wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or worse. It's the reason I'll never have the surgery... the risk is very small but if something were to happen to my eyesight it would be devastating. Glasses aren't so bad.

The complication risk of modern LASIK is actually nearly identical to wearing contacts every day.

Sure. But halos seem pretty common - every person I know who got LASIK done in the past 10 years experiences got them to some extent, my dad almost had a nervous breakdown because for the first year after the surgery the halos were so bad he couldn't really drive at night - they sort of faded away with time but he said they were always there and in hindsight, he wouldn't have selected surgery.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#113

Post by djeikyb »

rincebrain wrote: post #66
abritinthebay wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming they can. I can't - they don't fix my eyesight. That's actually quite common. Dalies are great if you can have them but they don't fix all conditions.

What about your vision is such that dailies can't correct for it, but other contacts can? Is it that you can't make use of "soft" contacts in general for this, or just (presumably) that making contacts to correct for this would be sufficiently costly for daily disposibles as to be infeasible?

kerataconus, which involves mild to severe astigmatism and a deformed cornea. from what i've read, it's a bit of both. there's a couple of newish soft contact designs i've heard of, but also there's the cost. at a point, glasses don't even provide sufficient correction.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#114

Post by lathiat »

jpwgarrison wrote: post #73
rincebrain wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about your vision is such that dailies can't correct for it, but other contacts can? Is it that you can't make use of "soft" contacts in general for this, or just (presumably) that making contacts to correct for this would be sufficiently costly for daily disposibles as to be infeasible?

Not the parent, but in my case - mild astigmatism - dailies are too big and floppy and don't stay put on my eye. 14 or 30 day are thicker and easier to put in. I use them rarely - just for skiing, and I end up using the 14 day ones once or twice and then throwing them away. But the daily ones are just mechanically awkward and uncomfortable.

Try different brands. My wife had the same problem when she went to an astigmatism lense they were too floppy and very difficult but persisted and changed brand/type (still dailies) and they're much better.

Stuff is changing all the time

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#115

Post by _MK_ »

rincebrain wrote: post #79
jpwgarrison wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the parent, but in my case - mild astigmatism - dailies are too big and floppy and don't stay put on my eye. 14 or 30 day are thicker and easier to put in. I use them rarely - just for skiing, and I end up using the 14 day ones once or twice and then throwing them away. But the daily ones are just mechanically awkward and uncomfortable.

Hm, I have mild astigmatism as well, but I've never explored whether or not I could get dailies. Good to know.

I'm on dailies with astigmatism and it has gone well. Ask your eye doctor about your options.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#116

Post by JumpCrisscross »

gambiting wrote: post #112
grinich wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The complication risk of modern LASIK is actually nearly identical to wearing contacts every day.

Sure. But halos seem pretty common - every person I know who got LASIK done in the past 10 years experiences got them to some extent, my dad almost had a nervous breakdown because for the first year after the surgery the halos were so bad he couldn't really drive at night - they sort of faded away with time but he said they were always there and in hindsight, he wouldn't have selected surgery.

Either of you have sources on these frequencies?

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#117

Post by bodyloss »

Why is it that the patent holder doesn't have to make a case with proof of infringment? Would it not make sense that if you want to defend a patent, you should show you've made the effort of documenting how someone is infringing?

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#118

Post by computator »

wapz wrote: post #85
nether wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously unless you're budget constrained, so much better. Cost twice as much as 2-week lenses, but you get to crack open a sterile pair each morning. Toss em at night.

Yup they are so much more comfortable. If you are running low and only wear them around 12 hours, you can even clean them and wear them another day (definitely not recommended by the manufacturer or eye doctor).

> not recommended by the manufacturer or eye doctor

I never found a technical explanation of why you shouldn't reuse dailies after overnight cleaning. I looked at papers, manufacturers' websites, and spoke to two ophthalmologists.

Though not a safety issue, my own experience is that dailies are more fragile than long-term lenses. (Could this be deliberate?) They fit less comfortably after a week of reuse. Also, they sometimes develop a very tiny nick at the periphery after many days; when that happens you feel it the moment you put it in.

My rule of thumb is that I reuse dailies for 5 days--disinfecting each day of course--and throw them out. The ophthalmologists, who are friends and can speak freely with me, agree that my regimen is fine.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#119

Post by gambiting »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #116
gambiting wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. But halos seem pretty common - every person I know who got LASIK done in the past 10 years experiences got them to some extent, my dad almost had a nervous breakdown because for the first year after the surgery the halos were so bad he couldn't really drive at night - they sort of faded away with time but he said they were always there and in hindsight, he wouldn't have selected surgery.

Either of you have sources on these frequencies?

I would be a bit difficult to give source on my personal friends and my dad, it's an anecdote :P Treat it like everything on the internet said by a random person - with caution. Just because everyone I know who got LASIK done has halos doesn't mean it's commonplace - could be just a coincidence.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#120

Post by creshal »

grinich wrote: post #105
xienze wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or worse. It's the reason I'll never have the surgery... the risk is very small but if something were to happen to my eyesight it would be devastating. Glasses aren't so bad.

The complication risk of modern LASIK is actually nearly identical to wearing contacts every day.

And that's why I wear glasses.
Post reply on HN