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

Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 128 posts

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#71

Post by alt227 »

layer8 wrote: post #39
jmyeet wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When has Apple ever sued over patent infringement? There was the Samsung case [1] but that was a design issue. Apple, Google, Meta and other big tech companies have used patents defensively not offensively . That is, as mutually-assured destruction. The real villains in this story are the patent holding companies that sue in East Texas to get in front of one judge that, at a time, heard a quarter of all US patent cas…

> When has Apple ever sued over patent infringement? Apple vs. HTC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litigation_involving_Apple_Inc... Normally, the threat implied by a patent moat is sufficient, so it doesn’t come to a lawsuit.

What is hilarious in that article is the quote from Jobs himself:

"[We] think competition is healthy, but competitors should create their own original technology, not steal ours"

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#72

Post by alt227 »

MikusR wrote: post #25
mulmen wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a fair comparison? Apple sells devices, Google sells targeted advertising. Their business and constraints are different.

Apple also sells services.

Apple mainly sells services

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#73

Post by jmyeet »

mherdeg wrote: post #41
jmyeet wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When has Apple ever sued over patent infringement? There was the Samsung case [1] but that was a design issue. Apple, Google, Meta and other big tech companies have used patents defensively not offensively . That is, as mutually-assured destruction. The real villains in this story are the patent holding companies that sue in East Texas to get in front of one judge that, at a time, heard a quarter of all US patent cas…

Would you accept weaponized trademark infringement as a sibling to patent law? The behavior described here seems odd -- I wouldn't call it "good" or "bad" in a moral sense just technically impressive: https://blog.giovanh.com/blog/2023/10/26/apples-trademark-ex... and https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/14/21436760/us-customs-state... .

Since the article is about patents I, too, limited the scope of my comments--quite deliberately--to patents so these are really out-of-scope. I mentioned Apple v. Samsung because of the confusing language ie "design patent".

The first case you mention is against third-party repair and parts. This isn't a simple issue. At one end of spectrum people have died from fake accessories (eg [1]). So while I trust (and use) Anker devices that are sold in the US, would I buy and use a charger in Cambodia? Probably not. So I support the idea of third-party repair but you have to deal with the question of quality and the parts being suitable.

The second relates to, again, design (and trademark). This is less defensible. I mean they do look like Airpods but really how many ways can you make an earpod?

[1]: https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/apple-replacing-fake-iphone-...

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#74

Post by alt227 »

ddxv wrote: post #47
fragmede wrote: post #4

I trust Apple's commitment to privacy as much as I do Google's, but when they both remove a product over a stupid patent rather than pay the patent holder (Sonos' sued Google with their multiroom audio patent), we can see that it's possible for corporations to hold principled views about things.

Apple's mobile "privacy" features are about monopolizing advertising on their mobile products so that Apple is now the number one iOS advertising company.

Id go the whole way and say that their entire walled garden ecosystem is designed to do this as well. Most Apple device users that I have spoken to have absolutely no idea how much it makes from advertising inside its own services.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/apple-is-an-ad-company-now

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#75

Post by Simulacra »

beacon294 wrote: post #66
JulianWasTaken wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you intimating Apple has been litigious with patents? Or just saying you have no sympathy for companies with lots of money? (This isn't a leading question, I have no informed opinion about Apple specifically.)

Two words: "rounded corners"

That and patenting the finger swipe are two of the most egregious hypocrisies of Apple's patent lawsuits. However it's really the USPTO that is to blame. IIRC if you're big enough you can just bully the patent office until they acquiesce. USPTO needs to learn how to say no, even to big corporations.

Which makes me wonder: Imagine if USPTO published statistics that enumerated patents that a company applied for and were turned down. My guess is Apple has never been told no.

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#76

Post by stupidcar »

thebruce87m wrote: post #26
sandworm101 wrote: post #3

Absolutely no sympathy. Those who live by the patent shall die by the patent.

What’s the alternative? Not play the patent game and die by the patent anyway?

For most people and companies, yes. But for Apple? They could have used their money and influence to campaign for patent reform.

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#77

Post by jmyeet »

Y_Y wrote: post #69
jmyeet wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When has Apple ever sued over patent infringement? There was the Samsung case [1] but that was a design issue. Apple, Google, Meta and other big tech companies have used patents defensively not offensively . That is, as mutually-assured destruction. The real villains in this story are the patent holding companies that sue in East Texas to get in front of one judge that, at a time, heard a quarter of all US patent cas…

Thisnis the internet, no need to post half remembered fragments. I'm sure the judge you're referring to is the notorious Rodney Gilstrap. Plenty of good info on that operation, e.g. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/06/east-texas-judge...

That was, I believe, they judge they wanted to get in front of. At one point there was another judge in that district that they didn't want to get in front of and a law firm just so happened to employ the second judge's son (? IIRC).

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#78

Post by kimixa »

jmyeet wrote: post #28
sandworm101 wrote: post #3

Absolutely no sympathy. Those who live by the patent shall die by the patent.

When has Apple ever sued over patent infringement? There was the Samsung case [1] but that was a design issue. Apple, Google, Meta and other big tech companies have used patents defensively not offensively . That is, as mutually-assured destruction. The real villains in this story are the patent holding companies that sue in East Texas to get in front of one judge that, at a time, heard a quarter of all US patent cas…

While not "sue-ing" but instead the other way - being trying to avoid paying for patented tech. They tried to stop paying licenses for their PowerVR-derived GPUs, which they were explicitly developed from so no "convergent evolution" excuses. Announcing it to the market then caused a massive abandonment of PowerVR and stock price drop, and purchase at fire sale prices by a Chinese "Strategic investment" group.

It never even made it to court - and they have since scrubbed all statements about that, and to this day still pay for the architecture license. Just too late for PowerVR as an independent IP vendor.

Never be a supplier to Apple - they will screw you over.

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#79

Post by Simulacra »

riley_dog wrote: post #63

I can't decide if I'd be a fool to buy an Apple Watch right now. I'm ready for an upgrade, but I fear what happens long term if hardware changes are necessary.

Apple has increasingly moved towards a disposable tech paradigm. They seem to want, expect, and maybe even contrive a reason for you to throw away your device and buy a new one every year.

Re: Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America

#80

Post by theturtletalks »

sandworm101 wrote: post #64
borgunit2 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m holding judgement until the case is investigated further. It’s my understanding that so far everyone has basically said, “there’s enough evidence to proceed in court.” Patent reform is something that is sorely needed (and more funding for the USPTO). Take for example this patent on an anti gravity device: https://www.nature.com/articles/438139a#:~:text=The%20US%20p... . And then there’s the patent troll problem.…

>> As a small shop, I am particularly afraid of trolls shutting us down overnight with basically no recourse. I be more scared of non-trolls who own giant catalogues of patents. The giant companies will shut you down just as fast as any "troll". Try to invent any device with a touchscreen and an internet connection. It won't be trolls knocking on your door, but lawyers from Samsung, Apple and Microsoft.

How do companies like FairPhone exist then?
Post reply on HN