Apple Defeats Patent Lawsuit in Texas Related to Face ID and Touch ID

[SMGreenfield]

How has big tech not pushed harder for serious patent reform? When our forefathers were patenting little machines, fine, because they more or less had to build it to get the patent. But now companies can just patent vague tech they have no capacity or intent to build. It has to stop.

I hold five software patents. Even though in my case I DID build the inventions, there is no requirement to do so.

I agree we need patent reform, especially for “business process” patents, but often times, software and hardware patents aren’t “vague”, but we are encouraged to write them to be as broadly applicable as the patent examiner will allow. That’s because the application will often get severely narrowed down by the examiner.

Patents can really help protect small companies, like mine. And remember — we only get 20 years of patent protection.

 

[haruhiko]

Here's the thing ... Does the "troll" as you called them, own the IP and is Apple using their IP without compensating them. You don't get to call foul because of who the owner is. You don't get to come into my house and use my stuff without me agreeing to let you use it or without you paying me. And how they got the property isn't really the other side's business as long as it wasn't done illegally.

Patent trolls are not the fault of the patent troll. They are the fault of the government and more exactly, Congress. IF you don't like them being in business, figure out how to legally put them out of business.

BTW, Apple and the rest of the tech gargantuans frequently abuse IP owned by others and count on their economic and political power to lessen or eliminate the risk

You have the logic completely backwards. Amazing.

 

[Naraxus]

At least Apple (and others) had the good sense to set up a separate company to patent troll for them.

Rockstar Consortium - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[WilliApple]

Oh no...
I hope these Patent Trolls don't require every Mac, every iPhone, every iPad's Touch and Face ID to be disabled...

 

[iMacDragon]

Why are they in the Apple TV?

Because a) it's built into every apple processor b), apple tv still needs to store passwords and such securely?

 

[StyxMaker]

My all time favorite, many years ago Amazon was being sued for violating the person’s patent on the ‘market basket’ metaphor for online shopping.

 

[jasonsmith_88]

A pending patent should be able to be gotten on a concept that hasn't been completed yet, but yeah, there needs to be a time limit to produce an actual product to retain that patent.

I think there needs to be more than a just a time limit. You need to prove that you have the resources and intent to build the product. The patent also needs to use technology that exists, or the patent needs to invent the technology.

For example, you should not be able to patent a method of operation for a sub-1nm CPU that manipulates quarks if the patent doesn’t actually describe how to manipulate quarks.

 

[svish]

Good for Apple. Will not be surprised if the other company appeals.

 

[rexhunt]

Great now win the blood oxygen sensor one so I can use the main feature I wanted my watch for

Just go to Canada or Mexico and buy one

 

[wood1208]

Hope Court makes Identity Security LLC pay hefty court fees, Apple's legal costs and compensation to Apple for time and distraction.

 

[Corefile]

On one hand, it seems like the patents that they’re talking about in the lawsuit are exactly what the Secure Enclave is. So maybe they had a case.

If you read the patents then it's clear to me that Apple have infringed their IP which is patented. I expect this to be appealed. The term "patent troll" is used by those who don't really understand how patents are meant to protect your IP. An internet presence is not relevant to patent enforceability.

 

[JimmyHook]

Simple solution. The US Patent Office should require one working prototype to grant a patent

 

[Kirkster]

I was considering upgrading my 5-year-old watch because I like some of the features of the high-end ones. But, I won’t give up the blood-oxygen sensor and I won’t wear two watches.

Heh, as I look down at my hands and see two watches, one feeds my soul, the other feeds my technological hind brain…

 

[jlc1978]

How has big tech not pushed harder for serious patent reform? When our forefathers were patenting little machines, fine, because they more or less had to build it to get the patent. But now companies can just patent vague tech they have no capacity or intent to build. It has to stop.

Big tech also uses patents to protect their products and stifle competition so it's not in their best interests to make too many changes.

If you read the patents then it's clear to me that Apple have infringed their IP which is patented. I expect this to be appealed. The term "patent troll" is used by those who don't really understand how patents are meant to protect your IP. An internet presence is not relevant to patent enforceability.

One problem is patents have gone from actual physical products to processes and concepts while getting overall broad in some cases.

 

[TheAppleGuySL]

Stupid Patent Trolls.

 

[CarAnalogy]

How has big tech not pushed harder for serious patent reform? When our forefathers were patenting little machines, fine, because they more or less had to build it to get the patent. But now companies can just patent vague tech they have no capacity or intent to build. It has to stop.

Same reason we get no real campaign finance reform, tort reform, etc etc.

Because they’re all playing the same game. Every now and then it doesn’t quite go their way, but it’s so tipped in their favor they don’t want to change the system.

For every time Google has lost in court, a thousand times they have bullied / persuaded another company with their own patents.

 

[nt5672]

I hold five software patents. Even though in my case I DID build the inventions, there is no requirement to do so.

I agree we need patent reform, especially for “business process” patents, but often times, software and hardware patents aren’t “vague”, but we are encouraged to write them to be as broadly applicable as the patent examiner will allow. That’s because the application will often get severely narrowed down by the examiner.

Patents can really help protect small companies, like mine. And remember — we only get 20 years of patent protection.

And even then only if you can afford to enforce the patent.

 

[adrianjagielak]

"it is now used in all iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple TV, Apple Watch, and HomePod models"

Already forgot about the Apple Vision Pro?

 

[Sippincider]

But now companies can just patent vague tech they have no capacity or intent to build.

IMO a patent filing should require a "First used in commerce" date in an actual product. The way it works with a registered trademark.

Would eliminate a lot of trolls. Plus the companies that throw patents on whatever sticks so they look "innovative" to investors.

 

[dannyyankou]

If you read the patents then it's clear to me that Apple have infringed their IP which is patented. I expect this to be appealed. The term "patent troll" is used by those who don't really understand how patents are meant to protect your IP. An internet presence is not relevant to patent enforceability.

Maybe I would be more sympathetic if they didn’t file these patents over the course of 7 years and didn’t do anything with them. But it’s difficult to find proof of this company even existing. I did a google search of Identity Security LLC between 2009-2016, and couldn’t find anything.

 

[jaw04005]

Good now put Touch ID under the glass like every other major smartphone maker.

 

[Macaholic868]

When will Apple Man up, come to a licensing agreement with Massimo to return the blood oxygen sensor to US users or innovate around the disputed patent in question since there are a ton of other devices that also have blood oxygen sensors that Massimo hasn’t sued that pays them no licensing fees with the understanding Apple, if it truly feels it’s in in the right here, will continue the dispute in court and will go after Massimo to recover those fees if it’s ultimately found in court that Apple didn’t violate those patents? I will not pay for a “new” Apple Watch that can’t do what my Apple Watch 7 can. I don’t care about information about my cycle as I’m a male and I don’t care about sleep apnea detection as I was already diagnosed with it and have a CPAP. What I do care about is my blood oxygen level because if my CPAP is malfunctioning but not audibly a blood oxygen sensor will alert me to the fact that something is up before it turns into a major problem and that’s more important to somebody already diagnosed with sleep apnea than a device that warns you that you may have it and tells you to visit the doctor for a sleep study you’ve already had. This is ridiculous. Apple new this was potentially a problem and waiting until, what, 2027 or 2028, for the patent to expire is dumb. Pay Massimo their money to offer the customer the best experience possible while attempting to recover those fees if Massimo is in the wrong or actually innovate and come up with a solution that they can’t argue violates a patent they hold or go out there and pay some other company to license their technology. They are acting like they are broke and homeless on this issue. I don’t want to hear it from a company I’m paying $500+ dollars to for a “smart” watch. That’s just dumb ……..

 

[eno12]

My all time favorite, many years ago Amazon was being sued for violating the person’s patent on the ‘market basket’ metaphor for online shopping.

My personal favorite is the one that sued Apple for iTunes infringing on their parent on a digital way to organize music by metadata (genre, artist,etc).

 

[leicaman]

If you can win in that court, there was no case to be made in any way, shape, or form. Period. End of story.

 

[leicaman]

Why are they in the Apple TV?

For secure log-in. It's in the SOC which is used by other devices, so since it's already there, might as well use it.