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

Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 93 posts

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#51

Post by hnlmorg »

lostlogin wrote: post #42
goodluckchuck wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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. While pretty aggressive, is it actually wrong to walk up to a worker and offer them a job?

Apple seem to think so because Steve Jobs specifically emailed Google to ask them to stop and a recruiter got fired for it.

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#52

Post by SirensOfTitan »

Could someone knowledgeable on the patent in question chime in on its defensibility? Masimo doesn’t seem like a patent troll here, they sell products, including a watch that take advantage of their patents presumably; however, I’m curious how broad the patent in question actually is.

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#53

Post by kemayo »

victor106 wrote: post #39

OT: anyone here used the Masimo smartwatch? https://www.masimopersonalhealth.com/products/masimo-w1 Now that I know the SPO2 monitor on my Apple Watch is shit. I am looking for something more accurate. I am a big Apple fanboy and always thought I could trust Apple’s products but I am beginning to doubt that with this case. They could’ve easily licensed Masimo’s tech and provided their customers better technology.

If Apple's in trouble for infringing on Masimo's patent, why would Masimo's watch have any better accuracy? The whole issue is that they're doing it the same way...

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#54

Post by raverbashing »

black_puppydog wrote: post #26
explaininjs wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 inc…

I think it's more like "since Apple plays hard with regards to patents, looks like they made their bed and might as well lay on it now"

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#55

Post by acomjean »

bagels wrote: post #36
sitzkrieg wrote: post #21

"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

Do you think I is not true? They will miss some sales, and thus revenue from this. Maybe many are unsympathetic, but it seems to be a factual prediction.

I mean people will just wait to buy the Apple Watch when it gets resolved and they are on sale again. It’s not like people will flock to the alternatives.

The harm is only significant if it drags out for a significant period of time. Apple will probably just remove some functionality and keep selling.

I mean it’s a watch, and the timekeeping aspects aren’t patented (I don’t think). Calculator watches existed since the 80s so that’s ok…my friend had a game on his watch in the 80s so that’s ok..

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#56

Post by dagmx »

whatever1 wrote: post #16
aurareturn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is poaching talent illegal? I thought tech employees have successfully sued big tech companies for anti-poaching policies many years ago? Could they have spoken to Masimo, determined that their asking price for the technology is unreasonable, the patents are not very defensible, Apple could develop it internally for much cheaper, and finally decide to also pay Masimo's employees more to increase development speed?

Poaching to re-implement patented technology, is.

That would be IP theft and is completely unrelated to the patent system, and that hasn’t been proven in this case fwiw.

While some patents were found to have been infringed, that is different than IP theft even if the same people are involved.

It’s a poor extrapolation or idea anyway. Patents are public, and no sane entity would hire someone to reimplement a patent without a license.

More likely, they thought they were far enough from the patents in their new implementation and either did not know of the specific patents (were the same employees named on those patents?) or had a different reading of the invention described.

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#57

Post by fnfjfk »

hnlmorg wrote: post #47
fnfjfk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the company whose workers were hired away didn’t want that to happen, they should have paid them more or offered better benefits. When this happens, it’s because workers are winning. Not just those with a new better-paying job, but everyone in the sector that benefits from rising wages.

In theory that’s fair, but in practice it is just another example of large companies with deep pockets bullying smaller businesses. Taking the interview at face value, those employees were already in the 98 percentile and Apple still doubled their wages.

You are implying that a company has any ownership whatsoever over its workforce. It does not. The workers are not “theirs”, and they are presumably employed under an “at-will” agreement.

Companies and owners sure do get upset when it’s the workers that take advantage of “at-will”.

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#58

Post by manquer »

gruez wrote: post #43
tw04 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shouldn’t. They’ve done this and similar multiple times now, got downvoted for pointing it out in another thread. Apple is not acting in good faith here. Some beancounter determined it would be cheaper to steal the tech than acquire the company so they decided to do the wrong thing for the wrong reason. I’ve yet to hear anyone even attempt to defend their behavior with a cogent argument.

>I’ve yet to hear anyone even attempt to defend their behavior with a cogent argument. "Apple thinks the patent is invalid" doesn't seem plausible to you? Masimo's lawsuit against Apple earlier this year was declared a mistrial, which doesn't rule out Apple as being innocent, but also suggests that the facts are not clearly favoring Masimo as you might think. [1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-declares-mistri…

There are established processes to invalidate a patent ?

It is more than 10 years since this started , patent office is slow but not that slow .

Apple may believe they didn’t infringe masimo’s tech and theirs is novel enough, I doubt they have made indication that they believe it is invalid.

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#59

Post by hnlmorg »

kemayo wrote: post #35
sitzkrieg wrote: post #21

"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

It's literally true, in the sense that they'll suffer harm and it won't be fixed if the appeal goes in their favor. They'll lose sales, and those sales won't just back-up and all get made the instant the product is on the market again. It's not an amount of harm that's actually significant to Apple, I'm sure, but it is irreparable.

Both yourself and the GP are technically correct depending on how you choose to interpret harm on the company.

The problem is that the tone of that claim implies the kind of harm that is significant while being just vague enough to also be covered under your interpretation should they get challenged on that statement.

Thus I would argue that Apple are still being disingenuous even if they are technically correct.

Re: Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch

#60

Post by kemayo »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #52

Could someone knowledgeable on the patent in question chime in on its defensibility? Masimo doesn’t seem like a patent troll here, they sell products, including a watch that take advantage of their patents presumably; however, I’m curious how broad the patent in question actually is.

I'm not knowledgeable on the patent, but the one I've seen referenced is: https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/en

It's basically "take this arrangement of sensors and put it on a smartwatch". So a lot of my opinion of it is going to rest on whether the arrangement of sensors is actually novel, or whether this is Masimo taking a long-existing setup and saying "but with a computer!" like all the most-mockable obvious patents.

Post reply on HN