InspiredCode

So this analyst came to his conclusion because he isn’t seeing rumors of new features, so there must not be new features. Sounds pretty sketchy

Kierkegaarden said:

hodar said:

“Patent Troll” seems to be an unfair label, in this case; based on this quote from the WSJ:

“A few months later, Mr. Kiani said, he got a call from his chief medical officer, Michael O’Reilly, informing him he was joining Apple, which he said had agreed to double his salary and pay him millions in Apple shares […]

Mr. Kiani is one of more than two dozen executives, inventors, investors and lawyers who described similar encounters with Apple. First, they said, came discussions about potential partnerships or integration of their technology into Apple products. Then, they said, talks stopped and Apple launched its own similar features.“

Michael O’Reilly started with Apple in 2013 and the other former Masimo employee mentioned in this situation, Marcelo Lamego, started in 2014.  O’Reilly is still at Apple and Lamego left after just a few months to start his own wearables company.  

Is the Masimo CEO claiming that “talks” started before 2013?  Because I’m assuming that hiring former employees might have an effect on any discussions about working together.  But putting that aside, the WSJ is reporting they claimed that “talks stopped and Apple launched its own similar features”.  The feature they must be referring to was released in 2020.  When did “talks” begin, and when did they end?

The patent system is dumb.  I’m not sure the timeline even matters. The two patents in question were filed by Masimo after the Apple Watch 6 was released and the patent infringement case is a proxy battle over those employees so not much related to them is directly relevant since they are not named in these patents even though this case has everything to do with them.

Basically Apple releases Apple Watch early September 2020, Masimo files patents late September 2020 that are granted in 2021 that looks just like Apple Watch 6, then Masimo sues Apple over Apple Watch 6 infringing on “their” design. All of this was likely done in retribution over employee poaching that is in itself legal in California. I’m not exactly sure how they get away with this, but probably because Masimo had a prior smart watch even though this was clearly just Masimo patenting Apple’s design.

This nonsense is all too common in our legal system.

Although Mark Gurman said it was a software fix, the only software fix that makes sense is disabling the feature since the two patents don’t cover anything that can be changed in software. I read Apple’s response as a proposed hardware change, but I guess we will see.

Sci-Fi shows use more Mac Pros then your average show to create too.

This is so obviously a bad take by the government. Exactly why we don’t trust politicians to make regulatory decisions. Interoperability of some core services could be a goal, but not with Apple’s private backend servers.