The ITC order makes an exception for the service, repair, or warranty period of units sold prior to December 25.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Pausing Sales of Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 in U.S. Due to Patent Dispute
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's IF the plaintiff (?) Accepts
Catching $$$ Grey market sales price boost!!
Anyone on the fence as a switcher this sales season could be more inclined to jump ship from Apple.
I would think the engineers pr the legal staff would get stern words for not even checking for existing patents BEFORE production or even product final testing stage!
If there is not such a checks & balances team there better well should be & most likely will be now for all products in the pipeline!
How was no proper check at the patent office not done?!!
In the U.S. at least, there are already patents for manufacturing processes. This is what the PTO refers to as a Utility Patent. As I recall its a 20 year deal. Apple might get a patent for the physical expression of a device, and a company like FoxConn might have patents on manufacturing. Basically, the PTO can grant a patent for:
- A process
- A machine
- A composition of matter
- A manufacturing technique
- A useful and new improvement on any of the above
This isn't about other peoples ideas. There isn't a single piece of IP on the Watch that Apple hasn't designed and patented. The ITC reviewed and thought their implementation wasn't unique enough to bypass another companies same idea with a similar implementation.
Apple could buy out Masimo but most likely Apple has already implemented a completely different approach and was waiting for the next generation to implement it, or they would have bought their IP out and shelved it years ago.
What's going to suck for many companies is when Apple starts filing microLED patent infringements across the globe as they are one of the largest holders of the IP in the world.
Apple's stock has been rebounding throughout the trading session since this announcement.
The next generation with a new series of sensors, etc., will be a big road block for a lot of these companies. If you read up on Apple's Watch patents that are now under their war chest you'll figure out that Masimo will hope to get bought out by Apple.
I’m not in the 1% but Apple benefits my pension fund quite nicely as is!
Companies that make medical devices that are sold to hospitals and doctor’s offices seldom become household names.
And seldom face actual competitive pressure, given how cartelized medical applications tend to be. But they apparently also own several consumer audio brands, surprisingly, probably some you’ve heard of if you’re at all into audio. Those might not be household names, but they’re well known in audiophile and home theater circles. As someone who’s not super active in but is at least somewhat familiar with those spaces, I was aware of multiple brands that I didn’t realize were owned by them. (They even have their own AirPlay 2 multi-room audio competitor.)
Let’s hope that for all of us who have already purchased one in good faith that Apple had the rights to sell it that we get a full refund (whilst keeping the watch as a good will gesture) 🤣
No, but you'll be able to join a $20m class-action suit for false advertising.
And if you win, you'll receive $32.13, with the lawyers collecting the rest. 😄
Last edited:
Just a correction - it is an article of manufacture, not a manufacturing technique (which is a process).
I took a cursory look at the patents and the ITC order and it appears that the only claims Apple was found to have infringed relate to the structure of the sensors on the back of the watch (not to the specific processing algorithms). And by the way, the infringed claims are quite specific, so the broader claims in these patents that Apple does not infringe are likely invalid as being obvious over the prior art and thus should not have been granted in the first place. This is why I think Apple still has an argument that all of the claims are invalid, to be argued on appeal most likely.
Also it is worthwhile noting that Masimo's patents date back to around 2008 (priority date), so the 20 year term on all patents in this family (each having priority to 2008) will be expiring in the next few years, but not soon enough to help Apple out of this bind.
The president likely will not veto the ITC order since (a) Apple does not have public support from other tech companies on this issue and (b) both Apple and Masimo are U.S. companies.
By the way, the ITC issues import exclusion orders for patent infringement all the time, but many of them are against foreign corporations. Most of these orders never make the news.
No, they’re acting like a company protecting their intellectual property, something Apple would rigorously do as well if the situation was reversed. At least that’s the view of the court. I’m sure if the situation was reversed, Apple would be the patent troll in your view…or maybe the court’s view would be your view in that case. Apple is a great company, a true American success story with a history of great products and hopefully with a very bright future ahead. That doesn’t mean we should cast a blind eye or give them a pass when they do something questionable. Anyway, I have a feeling Apple will fix this $oon and we can all move on then.
If ANYONE dares copy Apple in anyway shape or form, even if they have a fruit as a logo with a bite taken out and it’s NOTan Apple, Apple will sue them ALL quicker then you can blink, so don‘t make make excuses for when others do the same to Apple. They are a very very ruthless corporation that will take all it can and then more. Hence why they are so rich. And patents are submitted to the patent office that never seems to check if what Apple patents already exists, like slide to unlock.
Lol no.. I’ve seen Apple do some incredibly bad things, I’ve seen it literally laugh in the face of British Law when it was demanded, by the court, to print an apology and a statement that Samsung did not copy them, I’ve seen reports of the child sweat shops that dig up the raw materials in Apple products, I’ve seen Apple perform business by squaring up to Ericsson, a company that invented most of modern day mobile tech without which the iPhone wouldn’t be a phone, and they only settled almost practically outside the courtroom Ericsson was going to sue them in for not paying them the licence fee for their tech, just for Apple to get a better deal.
Yes I’ve seen Apple do soooo many bad utterly ruthless business actions, yet am I going to give up or stop buying Apple products? Am I heck! And neither will millions of others, so no its reputation won’t be damaged much in the eyes of the consumer.
Last edited:
Isn’t that the truth, like the EU forcing Apple to have USB C, That’s it leave the EU market now! Screw them! With little thought to the real damage that would cause Apple and the ‘gigantic’ loss of profits.. and the inevitable share price plummeting for good.
They make a larger margin when selling directly to individual customers than to retailers. So, they absolutely do care who buys it.
That would be a patent attorney. They make a handsome amount (and often have nice bow ties).
Important to remember this isn’t like a maths problem with a single right answer. There is a level of interpretation and creativity involved, and positions taken on what may or may not infringe.
It’s not that. It’s that the “waiting for the xxx people” comments are silly, creating a hypothetical person making the kind of argument you don’t agree with and then preemptively making fun of it seems strange. Often they are the only one making such comments too.
I worked in R&D in a different industry, and we did indeed have an employee who did go over patents relevant to our industry to make sure we were not infringing, and that the other guys were not poaching on our patents. It's especially important since the US switched to the First to File system.
Apple certainly has some people doing patent research, and I'm sure this team told Management they were on thin ice, but Someone high up blew them off.
Apple needs to apologize, pay the company for their patent, and get it behind them.
Also a lawyer (not in US). May I ask why you stopped doing patent litigation? Was it hard to change practice areas? Most patent lawyers I have met have deep specialities and I don’t think could change practice areas easily. I suppose you were a litigator so not just patents?