What's new in this patent? Cheap ($10) pulse ox sensors operating on similar principles have been available since well before this patent has been filed.
This patent is about a wearable ox sensor.
Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
121–130 of 510 posts
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#122IP/patent law is holding back innovation. Prove me wrong. You can’t invent anything or push something to market without stepping on at least 1 or more vague patents.
Countries with very lenient enforcement of IP laws have very minimal innovation. Brazil, Argentina, India. Countries who haven't signed TRIPS almost no innovation, North Korea, Somalia. Countries with the strictest patent laws and enforcement are the leaders in innovation. Germany, US, South Korea.
Strict enforcement of patent laws ensures that capital will be invested in innovation.
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pulse oxymeters exist for at least 30 years. What kind of patent does Masimo hold?
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10945648B2/en?oq=US-1094... It's fairly specific about an arrangement of sensors with specific capabilities.
If they make a version with only three photodiodes this patent will not apply.
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
From NYTimes "In court, Masimo detailed how Apple poached its top executives and more than a dozen other employees before later releasing a watch with pulse oximeter capabilities — which measures the percentage of oxygen that red blood cells carry from the lungs to the body — that were patented by Masimo." Doesn't sound like they accidentally stepped on a vague patent to me.
Does anyone know what specifically Masimo invented that Apple infringed upon? Pulse oximetry was in standard practice before the company existed, and Masimo's Wikipedia article doesn't mention Apple anywhere.
This lists 10,912,502 and 10,945,648 as the patents, but if you get into the details the original complaint lists several more:
https://www.usitc.gov/system/files?file=secretary/fed_reg_no...
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#125[flagged]
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the price will shoot up drastically as soon as the market is aware of someone Will that still happen if you put in a single order to buy 51% of all the shares at a price a little above the current market value ? That trade will be complete before the market "sees" you are trying to buy a ton.
That’s kind of what I had in mind, I don’t really know if it’s feasible or not but if I had billions of dollars deposited in my Robinhood account just made the order for that many shares, would it not go through?
It would not go through: you can only buy as many shares at once as other people are currently offering at that specified price, which would be negligible compared to the total amount of shares.
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#127All these intellectual property lawsuits look like an economic loss overall. The laws don’t work as intended if they aimed to encourage innovation
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#128IP/patent law is holding back innovation. Prove me wrong. You can’t invent anything or push something to market without stepping on at least 1 or more vague patents.
A lot of medicine requires $100's of millions of R&D, with a high chance of failure. No company would take that risk if their work wasn't protected. So at least in some fields, it spurs innovation.
The idea is good, the implementation is horrible.
Perhaps a page with business logic is needed. What you expect from the patent, what a license will cost, what roi they expect per unit sold. If the intend is to either exploit the patent themselves, have others do it or some combination of the two. (rule out patents intended to hinder development) A description of the effort and expertise it took to develop the application.
Perhaps one should submit a product for review and have the patent office list relevant patents along with the bill and/or contract. Like a modular system with a single check out. Add a 10-20% fee in case the patent office makes a mistake so that patent holders can still be paid. That would make sure the patent office would make an effort towards realistic fees.
Just some dumb ideas I came up with just now, I'm sure others have much better ideas for improvements.
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> met with them, and then decided they'd rather do it themselves ..., headhunted Masimo engineers, and hired them to reimplement a pulse-ox device. > Masimo and Apple began their relationship in 2013, when Apple discussed potentially integrating Masimo’s sensing technology into future Apple products. Internally, Apple executives debated the idea of buying Masimo and making its chief executive a vice president, accord…
From an employee's point of view, I'm 100% OK with that. If Apple wants to throw money at an engineer to do the same thing they were already doing, but for Apple, then by all means do so. I don't think it's at all unethical to hire away employees. If it were, that'd lead to bad outcomes for those people (i.e. artificially suppressed wages).
… which is in fact something Apple was doing in the past. It's somewhat ironic when a company that gets in trouble for their anti-poaching shenanigans now gets accused of poaching.
To me, it's clear that hiring competitors' employees is not morally wrong, and for the most part it's not legally wrong either, PROVIDED those employees do not take along their prior employers' confidential information.
Re: Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sure you're familiar with the meaning of "infinite", as I'm sure you are familiar with the difference between "market capitalization" and "cash on hand". Assuming those two statements to be true, what's your point? EDIT: and I see parent pulled a ninja edit. Stay classy.
One point: many here have made comments like "Masimo is a $4B company, screw `em, they can fend for themselves". I think commentary on Masimo's value/available resources should be in context to their competitor.
[deleted]