Apple Sued Over Alleged Face ID Patent Infringement

[jz0309]

A patent lawsuit filed in Texas, the western district - that says it all.

 

[jz0309]

This can't be accurate.
Apple would never infringe upon a patent.
They are the good guys!

View attachment 2659686

No, Apple is the bad one, always, for some here on MR

 

[Nickerbocker]

On one hand, it sucks how these things can lead to users losing access to features, like the O2% blood monitor on Apple Watch.

On the other hand, Apple is a multi-trillion dollar corporation that can afford to pay and has a history of bullying others with its own patents.

 

[frenchcamp49er]

They'll lose.

 

[I7guy]

For maximum impact. Lol

Patent infringements are retroactive, meaning you pay for every product you used said patent on if you have been found to be infringing on the patent. 3 generations also establish that Apple willfully infringed on their patent over 3 generations of products so Apple can't deny that it was a coincidence and also prove that the patent is valuable.

Possible Apple didn’t believed they had infringed. Or they knew it and infringed anyway. This will all come out.

So if apple may not have believed they infringed.

Another day, another lawsuit.

 

[blaureiter]

Apple has used Face ID for nearly 9 years and this company has JUST filed a complaint. Of course in Texas. They may be surpised since Texans might not take kindly to a company from Europe bringing suit - compared to how they love patent trolls who have a "office" in Texas. While they claim a question about detecting skin tone, the real value of Apple's version of face id is the facial bone structure identification, not a simple "picture" that once fooled a Samsung phone.

 

[RedWeasel]

I would bet money that someone used AI to go through their patents and suggest any possible, no matter how fringe or ridiculous, possible infringement and then they ran that AI result through some other calculators and determined the highest value targets and decided suing apple was worth it. This is not a judgment on rightness or wrongness it's just that this infringement is very old and suddenly such an obscure lawsuit appears with very little obvious connection.

Sounds like a process I'd try to get a patent for...

 

[RedWeasel]

We're all lucky the idea of language wasn't patented or we'd all be paying royalties just for speaking, no matter the language.

Well, about that...

https://www.chatgpt.com

 

[MrSnirf]

Possible Apple didn’t believed they had infringed. Or they knew it and infringed anyway. This will all come out.

So if apple may not have believed they infringed.

Another day, another lawsuit.

No that's not possible. "If" Apple is found to infact infringe on the patents, it is impossible to argue that they didn't believe they had not. The patent is fairly detailed and specific enough. A source code and biometric stack audit would quickly prove if Apple didn't infringe on the patent.

 

[Anaxarxes]

So it took them 9 years to figure this out - since the iPhone X?

The complaint says Apple's original version of Face ID, introduced with the iPhone X in 2017, did not use trinamiX's technology, but that newer iPhones and iPads do. TrinamiX's system is designed to tell real skin apart from things like photos or masks, essentially adding a check that catches fakes conventional optical face scanning methods would miss.

 

[ChrisA]

it's moronic that generic ideas are patentable.

We're all lucky the idea of language wasn't patented or we'd all be paying royalties just for speaking, no matter the language.

Using an IR scanner device to determine if a face is made of skin or plastic is hardly a "generic idea". Likely, Apple figured their method was different enough not to be covered by the patent. No one here can know if it is without reading the actual pattent and disassembly an iPhone, and reading the code.

 

[visualseed]

The sad thing is it’s probs cheaper to infringe than to pay royalties long term.

But what bothers me about this is why wait to raise the lawsuit after allegedly three generations of devices and soon to be four being launched with this infringement?

I'm guessing they sent some demand letters, likely had some back-and-forth over licensing, and when neither side would compromise, TrinamiX went nuclear and filed a lawsuit. This process could easily take a couple of years, even if handled in good faith.

 

[ChrisA]

I would bet money that someone used AI to go through their patents and suggest any possible, no matter how fringe or ridiculous, possible infringement and then they ran that AI result through some other calculators and determined the highest value targets and decided suing apple was worth it. This is not a judgment on rightness or wrongness it's just that this infringement is very old and suddenly such an obscure lawsuit appears with very little obvious connection.

AI is not so good. The company holds a patent on it. Likely, they took this long to reverse-engineer a few phones to discover the method used. Just looking at a phone, you can't know how it works, and analysis is very hard.

If you do think AI is that good, try it yourself. Ask Gemini or GPT.

 

[falainber]

But testing back in 2017 ascertained you could not fool FaceID with a model or facial casting.

If that was the case, why did Apple changed their design (and used trinamiX approach instead)?

 

[visualseed]

If that was the case, why did Apple changed their design (and used trinamiX approach instead)?

Allegedly using their approach. But there were a lot of improvements made to FaceID over the years that made it faster and more reliable in other ways that could turn a non-infringing method that was slow into an infringing method that made Face ID "The Fastest Face ID Ever!"

 

[cdsapplefan]

Apple’s 🍎 patent lawyers are ready to feast 💰 🤑

 

[surferfb]

This one seems dubious to me. Also trying to figure out how a device released in 2023 could infringe on a patent granted in 2026.

Watch Apple countersue for TrinamiX infringing on the original faceID patent 🤣

 

[code-m]

If Apple has a patent on FaceID and it is found that it predates this other companies patent does that mean Apple is able to counter-sue for damages. 🤔

 

[neuropsychguy]

If that was the case, why did Apple changed their design (and used trinamiX approach instead)?

trinamiX isn’t claiming Apple used its approach, just that Apple infringed on patents they have. That’s an important distinction here.

 

[I7guy]

Using an IR scanner device to determine if a face is made of skin or plastic is hardly a "generic idea". Likely, Apple figured their method was different enough not to be covered by the patent. No one here can know if it is without reading the actual pattent and disassembly an iPhone, and reading the code.

Infrared tech was invented in the 1800. 125 years later using that tech to determine the target substance ought to be generic.

 

[Contact_Feanor]

If that was the case, why did Apple changed their design (and used trinamiX approach instead)?

it's not even implied that they did; if you read well, maybe apple didn't change a thing, but "started infringing on" the patents because the patents were only then granted...

 

[I7guy]

No that's not possible. "If" Apple is found to infact infringe on the patents, it is impossible to argue that they didn't believe they had not. The patent is fairly detailed and specific enough. A source code and biometric stack audit would quickly prove if Apple didn't infringe on the patent.

“Officer I didn’t believe I was exceeding the speed limit” sure you can argue it, might not win it.

 

[contacos]

Apple has used Face ID for nearly 9 years and this company has JUST filed a complaint. Of course in Texas. They may be surpised since Texans might not take kindly to a company from Europe bringing suit - compared to how they love patent trolls who have a "office" in Texas. While they claim a question about detecting skin tone, the real value of Apple's version of face id is the facial bone structure identification, not a simple "picture" that once fooled a Samsung phone.

You all need to read more than a damn headline before complaining!

 

[DblHelix]

Took them a decade to figure this out? Guess that is one way to guarantee a massive payment knowing how many instances of violation they have at this point

 

[Populus]

No. That’s covered near the top of MacRumor’s article: “The complaint says Apple's original version of Face ID, introduced with the iPhone X in 2017, did not use trinamiX's technology, but that newer iPhones and iPads do.”

iPhone 15 and newer.

Wow, thanks. I was about to comment the same thing as @now i see it

I guess that we should relax and take time to read the entire article instead of reading the headline and jumping into the comments.