Apple Appeals US Ban on Apple Watch Blood Oxygen Feature

onenorth said:
The former CEO made public statements to the effect of "the only way Masimo would agree to a license is if Masimo was involved in developing SPO2 tech with Apple." He was suggesting that Apple wasn't doing SP02 sensing well enough for Masimo to put their stamp of approval on it. He was also upset about Apple "poaching" engineers.
Click to expand...

Can you share some quotes to that effect? Every other tech company doing SpO2 has successfully negotiated with Masimo. No other company has joined Apple in its fight. Either Apple is wrong or Masimo. Which do you think is more likely?

onenorth said:
Now he's gone, but the litigation has been trending in Apple's direction. Many of Masimo's patents have been invalidated or rendered not infringed. Apple is making a business decision not to settle. It's just blood oxygen sensing, not a core feature of the Apple Watch, and only restricted in the U.S. I suppose they can live without it until they come up with something else or get the appeals court to drop the import ban, or just wait for the patents to expire in 2028.
Click to expand...

No, it really hasn't. That's why you see this last ditch effort by Apple against this final ITC ruling. It's not even a technical argument against a Masimo patent, Apple is basically saying ITC violated an administrative procedure in determining whether a "domestic industry" exists. The law says ITC has the right to make that determination.
 
JPack said:
Can you share some quotes to that effect? Every other tech company doing SpO2 has successfully negotiated with Masimo. No other company has joined Apple in its fight. Either Apple is wrong or Masimo. Which do you think is more likely?
Click to expand...
Those quotes are linked in other threads on this forum relating to this issue.

Both companies have been at each other for years. They are both "playing a long game."
 
onenorth said:
Those quotes are linked in other threads on this forum relating to this issue.

Both companies have been at each other for years. They are both "playing a long game."
Click to expand...

You're not going to find it because it doesn't exist. It falls into the same category as people claiming the CEO didn't want to settle or they were asking an unreasonable amount for licensing.

Everyone from GE HealthCare, Philips, Qualcomm, to Google have partnered with Masimo. Apple stands as the outlier. Tim Cook is the only CEO that has said, "We're focused on appeal" and "there's lots of reasons to buy the watch even without the blood oxygen sensor.”
 
JPack said:
You're not going to find it because it doesn't exist. It falls into the same category as people claiming the CEO didn't want to settle or they were asking an unreasonable amount for licensing.

Everyone from GE HealthCare, Philips, Qualcomm, to Google have partnered with Masimo. Apple stands as the outlier. Tim Cook is the only CEO that has said, "We're focused on appeal" and "there's lots of reasons to buy the watch even without the blood oxygen sensor.”
Click to expand...
This has already been discussed. He wanted more than money.

https://archive.is/ZKkTd#selection-4829.0-4829.230

The executive, speaking Tuesday on Bloomberg TV, said the “short answer is yes,” when asked if he’d settle, but he declined to say how much money he’d seek from Apple. Kiani said he would “work with them to improve their product.”
Click to expand...
 
btrach144 said:
Apple has some really bad legal council. Like really bad.

I’m not a lawyer and even I know that a patent doesn’t need to have an actual product for it to be valid.

This is a pathetic argument. I’m rooting for O2 monitoring to come back as I miss it and I want Apple to win but it’s also clear they broke the patent.
Click to expand...
You think Apple pays $1b per year for bad legal advice? I don’t buy it.
 
Last edited:
onenorth said:
This has already been discussed. He wanted more than money.

https://archive.is/ZKkTd#selection-4829.0-4829.230
Click to expand...

That's your proof? Nobody is reading it as "more than money."

Masimo offers more than just pulse ox. They have pulse CO-oximetry, blood pressure, infant monitoring technology, etc. Kiani is saying they can offer more than just a one-time transaction.

Of course he's not going to negotiate on live TV.

You should watch the video interview on Bloomberg instead of taking a fraction of a snippet out of context.
 
JPack said:
That's your proof? Nobody is reading it as "more than money."

Masimo offers more than just pulse ox. They have pulse CO-oximetry, blood pressure, infant monitoring technology, etc. Kiani is saying they can offer more than just a one-time transaction.

Of course he's not going to negotiate on live TV.

You should watch the video interview on Bloomberg instead of taking a fraction of a snippet out of context.
Click to expand...
You obviously didn’t read the other article I linked regarding the injunctions. But hey guess what it’s not for us to decide what Apple wants to do about this.

Also those other products have nothing to do with the patents at issue.
 
I7guy said:
You think Apple pays $1b per year for bad legal advice? I don’t buy it.
Click to expand...
onenorth said:
Everyone here is an armchair lawyer.
Click to expand...
Well when your engineering team screws the pooch and implements designs that are patented, you aren’t left with a strong legal standing.

So I imagine they’re doing the best they can considering their hands are tied behind their back in this case.
 
btrach144 said:
Well when your engineering team screws the pooch and implements designs that are patented, you aren’t left with a strong legal standing.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t mean they were given bad legal advice. Sometimes infringements happen. That’s what the courts decide.
btrach144 said:
So I imagine they’re doing the best they can considering their hands are tied behind their back in this case.
Click to expand...
👍
 
I7guy said:
Doesn’t mean they were given bad legal advice. Sometimes infringements happen. That’s what the courts decide.
Click to expand...
If I give a client an opinion of non-infringement (which is a legal judgment call), the client still runs the risk that they are infringing (as decided by the court). A fair difference of opinion can exist. It takes a fair amount of claim interpretation and prior art interpretation. But with a non-infringement opinion in hand, they likely won't be liable for triple damages due to willful infringement. So it's a risk they might (or might not) be willing to take.

When I look at the Masimo patent claims that the ITC found infringed, it isn't entirely clear to me at first blush that Apple was infringing. The Masimo patents were geared toward a sensor that was separate from the control unit. But whoever drafted those patents threw in some discussion about the sensor and controller potentially being together in some sort of wrist-worn device (which Masimo was not making at the time). After Apple came out with the Apple Watch, Masimo went back to the patent office and applied for more patents having claims crafted to target the Apple Watch, leveraging that discussion from the earlier applications. It was a clever move, but sometimes it doesn't work.

We will see if the Federal Circuit agrees with the ITC on this one.
 
btrach144 said:
Well when your engineering team screws the pooch and implements designs that are patented, you aren’t left with a strong legal standing.
Click to expand...
See my post above. When Apple Watch debuted with SpO2, Masimo had "prior rights" to the IP but didn't have claims to anything that Apple would be infringing IIRC. So when Apple designed the watch, they were not technically infringing anything. Masimo used something called continuation practice to obtain new patents, with new claims, that had priority over Apple Watch, but after the fact. It is controversial but, for now, legal practice. So I would not say Apple's legal standing wasn't strong. It was risky (they were aware of Masimo's IP), but lots of tech companies do risky things. Innovation isn't stifled by patents unless everyone is highly risk adverse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top