Misimo is nt a Pattent troll. They invented the technology and currently sell devices that use it. Appleblantantly sole the technology and got caught.
Yes they are, but Masimo actively manufactures a broad range of medical device products with its patents, including a competing smartwatch.
Yes and no. While they do have products on the market (which means that they don’t qualify under the traditional definition of patent troll), when you look at their complaint, it looks like they’re trying to enforce a patent (an expired one, I might add) on the very idea of a pulse oximeter. Overly broad patents held by a firm with significant market power in captured markets (the highly regulated market for professional grade pulse oximeters, ie for hospitals and the like) weaponizing patents against would be competitors in the consumer space would probably qualify as a patent troll in most people’s eyes.
Probably, but the next time you update the software in the US it'll probably disable it
Why? They are protecting their patent. I am not sure how this hurts consumers anyway? Small fluctuations don't mean anything and no one who actually needs to monitor their pulse oximetry uses an Apple Watch to do so. They already have an FDA approved medical device that costs maybe $15 -$20. It's also pretty simple. 93 and above, good job. 88 to 92, call your doctor. 72 to 88, go to the ER. Below 72, call a mortician.
Perhaps you can explain why protecting your IP and taking legal steps to do that makes Masimo a patent troll. Patent trolls are generally firms that buy up patents for the sole purpose of filing profitable lawsuits. This is not Massimo.
I’m not a lawyer (let alone an IP lawyer), but I think that’s only the case for trademarks and not patents, if I’m not mistaken. Firms have to protect their trademarks to prevent them from being genericized (a la Dumpster or Kleenex, or Band-Aid [look at Band-Aid’s insistence on “Band-Aid Brand” in their marketing]). But that concept doesn’t apply to patents, if I understand correctly.
According to the article the patent (or the last of them that apply) expires in 2028.
Well said.
I'm not a lawyer yet, and not specializing in IP, but my understanding, taken from someone who is an expert in IP, is that patents can still be substantially weakened by a failure to defend.
It will work. Apple Watches with the sensor disabled have a hardware/firmware revision and a different part number (ending in LW/A).
Right, that seemed like a pretty huge reach on their part. Especially since it required running an older version of iOS. That reeks more of entitlement on Masimo’s part than anything else, like they were trying to punish Apple by blocking all sales of the Apple Watch Series 9 in the US entirely* just as punishment for having the temerity to try to get around their patent fees (which must be quite high, that’s the only reason any of this would make any sense).
How? They filed a complaint and went through the proper channels. That hardly seems unethical to me.
In one word: Yes.
Not true. As another posted mentioned, in trademarks, if you don't protect the right, it might become genericized, but not patents. Unlike a trademark, which does not have a fixed time period, a patent is 20 years. You do not lose your rights just because you do not police your patent in those 20 years. Does it make it harder to license it to an exclusive licensee if you are not policing infringements? Absolutely. But you do not lose your rights if you chose not to police.
no, they should not acquire Masimo. Apple should license the patent and move on. Apple also is worth trillions, but does not "have" trillions per se. Market valuation and equity are very different things. Apple as a company has about 62.15 Billion dollars in equity as of 2023.
