"In today’s filing, Apple’s attorneys claimed the $3 trillion company “will suffer irreparable harm” if the models remain off the shelves during legal proceedings."
lmaoo what a joke
Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
21–30 of 93 posts
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#22They want a stay so the courts have time to make a decision, but last I heard from Masimo's CEO they haven't even come to the table to make a deal outside of court. Why should good faith be extended to these thieves who are acting entitled to this technology even now and show no remorse or contrition? If they worked with Masimo they could develop an accurate FDA approved health sensor, but they want to sell their cus…
This is only the Masimo side of the story. Apple hasn't made a statement that I'm aware of. I doubt Masimo has patents on the only possible ways to measure Blood oxygen.
I wonder if their patent is something like "This is a patent for measuring blood oxygen by using measurement tools and methods to determine the amount of oxygen in the blood", not unlike the 1990's "uses computers to store and transmit [health] information" patents.
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#23They want a stay so the courts have time to make a decision, but last I heard from Masimo's CEO they haven't even come to the table to make a deal outside of court. Why should good faith be extended to these thieves who are acting entitled to this technology even now and show no remorse or contrition? If they worked with Masimo they could develop an accurate FDA approved health sensor, but they want to sell their cus…
This is only the Masimo side of the story. Apple hasn't made a statement that I'm aware of. I doubt Masimo has patents on the only possible ways to measure Blood oxygen.
I worked for a medical company in ‘97 that had an SPO2 meter they thought was pretty special. That would surely be out of patent now. Wikipedia has the first example as 1935, and Minolta making the first commercial model in 1977.
Most of them have the sensor and emitter on opposing sides of an earlobe, or a finger. So maybe that’s the unique part?
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#24Here [1] is the CEO of Masimo (a public company, making medical devices for decades) It seems that Apple deceived Masimo that they are interested in collaborating, and then proceeded to poach Masimo's technical people to basically steal their technology. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1o8EoW-Eg
Don’t use the term “poaching” to refer to workers deciding to work somewhere else. Workers aren’t owned by their employers, like the king’s deer. https://medium.com/42hire-don-t-panic-just-hire/stop-calling...
It still seems like a useful metaphor when talking about the interactions of higher level entities like corporations.
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I've never seen HN more pro-patent than when it means being anti-Apple. I wonder how an embedding model would rank "What is the best Thing?" for HN commenters... my guess is patents would be near the bottom, but Apple would be even lower. Where would "proprietary software" fit int?
I think the ideal situation is that the judge fines both sides for wasting everyones' time. IANAL tho.
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I've never seen HN more pro-patent than when it means being anti-Apple. I wonder how an embedding model would rank "What is the best Thing?" for HN commenters... my guess is patents would be near the bottom, but Apple would be even lower. Where would "proprietary software" fit int?
What's the issue? Over-simplifying "slightly" the argument is:
HN: patents are terrible and should be abolished
also HN: while patents are terrible, it's a reality that they're not going anywhere right now. so in the meantime, it makes sense to apply their most annoying implications also and especially to a huge corporation that is one of the most powerful pro patent advocates and patent (ab)users.
I don't see an inconsistency here.
Edit: flipping this around, why should it be this?
Also HN: let's give apple a pass here. sure, they can and do use patents as weapons, but we should show them lenience when they're on the receiving side.
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#27They want a stay so the courts have time to make a decision, but last I heard from Masimo's CEO they haven't even come to the table to make a deal outside of court. Why should good faith be extended to these thieves who are acting entitled to this technology even now and show no remorse or contrition? If they worked with Masimo they could develop an accurate FDA approved health sensor, but they want to sell their cus…
> but they want to sell their customers a second rate product that they stole and shoddily copied on the cheap.
Yup. When I think of Apple's engineering and design prowess, the first two phrases that come to mind are definitely "second rate" and "shoddily copied".
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#28They want a stay so the courts have time to make a decision, but last I heard from Masimo's CEO they haven't even come to the table to make a deal outside of court. Why should good faith be extended to these thieves who are acting entitled to this technology even now and show no remorse or contrition? If they worked with Masimo they could develop an accurate FDA approved health sensor, but they want to sell their cus…
[flagged]
More consistent than you think- and the stronger each individual statement is, perhaps the more consistent with each other they become!
If only the most well-justified patents are allowed, and most patents rejected, then it follows that the patents that are left really deserve to be upheld and enforced
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#29Here [1] is the CEO of Masimo (a public company, making medical devices for decades) It seems that Apple deceived Masimo that they are interested in collaborating, and then proceeded to poach Masimo's technical people to basically steal their technology. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1o8EoW-Eg
Don’t use the term “poaching” to refer to workers deciding to work somewhere else. Workers aren’t owned by their employers, like the king’s deer. https://medium.com/42hire-don-t-panic-just-hire/stop-calling...
The King owns the land, not the deer. The deer are free to leave… and if they enter onto someone else’s land they may be hunted by someone else. But this assumes they do leave.
It’s one thing to message someone on LinkedIn. It’s something else to enter into a competitors place of business and make the same offers.
Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I've never seen HN more pro-patent than when it means being anti-Apple. I wonder how an embedding model would rank "What is the best Thing?" for HN commenters... my guess is patents would be near the bottom, but Apple would be even lower. Where would "proprietary software" fit int?
Years ago quite a few prominent HN commenters were quite adamant about defending the legitimacy of Apple's "rounded corners" design patents. If Apple's competitors need to respect patents protecting Apple, then Apple needs to respect patents too.
*unsheathes swords* "Leave alone the multi-trillion dollar corporation"