Biometric Sensor Company Valencell Accuses Apple of Stealing Technology for Apple Watch

[Robert.Walter]

Far as I know, it is neither illegal or unethical to download publicly available white papers while using an alias.

This could have been done for at least two good reasons; to prevent anyone from knowing that Apple was researching this tech and to verify info being provided by the vendors sales team.

 

[Small White Car]

Clearly Apple stole their technology,. They have done this before with Xerox and countless other companies.
Now let Apple apologists, defend Apple

Try actually reading some history before trying to be all smug about it.

http://www.mac-history.net/computer-history/2012-03-22/apple-and-xerox-parc

Let me guess. You watched "Pirates of Silcon Valley" and didn't know about the stock deal that Apple gave XEROX in exchange for the visits.

When you pay for something that's not "stealing."

 

[Iconoclysm]

Likewise, it baffles me when people start defending Apple and trashing Valencell, whilst knowing zip amazes me.

I'm seeing very little trashing of Valencell but their statement about Steve Jobs has to be one of the most unprofessional and telling parts of this article. Your comment about them clearly being ripped off is flat out insanity, you have no evidence and virtually no knowledge of their technology - given you think Apple stole from Xerox, you likely have virtually no knowledge of ANY technology.

 

[Ball]

And here comes the hate...

Always possible, but more than likely sour grapes.

Sound like a fact to me. I just saw the expose on Jobs and Apple's corporate malfeasance which includes slave labor in China and billions in offshore account aka double Irish. It would not surprise me to find out that apple stole technology and violated copyrights.

Knowing what I know now I can't see myself buying Apple products.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Totally agreed, the Apple Watch is a failure.

Would like to know your thoughts on one of the five Galaxy Gear products, then?

 

[manu chao]

They are going after Fitbit.

Valencell Files Patent Infringement Suit against Apple, Inc. and Fitbit, Inc.

With Apple they can at least point to having met with Apple and presented their technology to them. Have they done the same in regard to Fitbit? Possibly, if their business is licensing technology, talking to potential customers is part of the game. How much you give away in those meetings is always a tricky question.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Sound like a fact to me. I just saw the expose on Jobs and Apple's corporate malfeasance which includes slave labor in China and billions in offshore account aka double Irish. It would not surprise me to find out that apple stole technology and violated copyrights.

Knowing what I know now I can't see myself buying Apple products.

Oh that's rich. "I just saw a 'documentary' full of accusations about Apple that I don't really understand and have virtually nothing to compare with from other companies...but I believe it all as fact!"

 

[dark_knight177]

Let me guess. You watched "Pirates of Silcon Valley" and didn't know about the stock deal that Apple gave XEROX in exchange for the visits.

Let me guess, you read about the Xerox deal on Apple loyalists' blog, which was made up by Apple fans for Apple fans.
Any actual proof about the deal? Other than from Apple fanatics' blog.

 

[Small White Car]

Let me guess, you read about the Xerox deal on Apple loyalists' blog, which was made up by Apple fans for Apple fans.
Any actual proof about the deal? Other than from Apple fanatics' blog.

Sure - Try the entire rest of the Internet.

I guess if you're taking this to the level of "the moon landing didn't happen" then there's nothing else I can do to convince you.

 

[dark_knight177]

Sure - Try the entire rest of the Internet.

By the rest of the internet, you mean the rest of the Apple centric blogs? which are obviously biased?

 

[Iconoclysm]

Let me guess, you read about the Xerox deal on Apple loyalists' blog, which was made up by Apple fans for Apple fans.
Any actual proof about the deal? Other than from Apple fanatics' blog.

Fact: most of the engineers that created this technology left to join Apple and work on the Mac. Fact: Jobs didn't even want to see what was going on at PARC but was convinced to check it out by those very same engineers who worked on the stuff. Fact: Xerox thought it was all useless tech, and sold it to Apple. Now, Mr. "can't possibly be biased in any way because I own Apple stuff", prove otherwise.

 

[manu chao]

Sound like a fact to me. I just saw the expose on Jobs and Apple's corporate malfeasance which includes slave labor in China and billions in offshore account aka double Irish. It would not surprise me to find out that apple stole technology and violated copyrights.

Apple is a bit more conservative than other companies. It doesn't use the Dutch Sandwich nor any offshore companies in the Caribbean. But it still gets its tax rate down to low single digits.

[EDIT] The single digit tax rate refers to the profits booked through their Irish subsidiary (which covers sales to all of Europe), not their global profits.

 

[Iconoclysm]

http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/348

Here you go, is that an Apple Fansite too? I mean, they happen to specialize in the history of computing, which will undoubtedly make them specialists in Apple's history being the first PC manufacturer...damn, guess they don't count. Perhaps we should visit Samsung's museum of innovation (brainwashing) instead?

 

[dark_knight177]

Jobs didn't even want to see what was going on at PARC

You didn't provide any facts that Xerox were given Apple stock in exchange for their ideas.
Even if jobs didn't want to attend PARC, he eventually DID and eventually USED their ideas, in exchange for NOTHING!

 

[Iconoclysm]

Apple is a bit more conservative than other companies. It doesn't use the Dutch Sandwich nor any offshore companies in the Caribbean. But it still gets its tax rate down to low single digits.

No, it does not...where are you getting this info? Apple pays above 30%, one of the highest of all companies in the US. What you're referring to is their global revenue being held in Ireland instead of repatriating it, it's quite different, they've already paid taxes on that in other countries to begin with.
[doublepost=1451955486,1451955408][/doublepost]

You didn't provide any facts that Xerox were given Apple stock in exchange for their ideas.
Even if jobs didn't want to attend PARC, he eventually DID and eventually USED their ideas, in exchange for NOTHING!

Why do you continue to speak as if this is fact?!??!?! It's common knowledge, and you somehow are on a high horse spewing nonsense and demanding everyone else disprove it...without using any links to anything on the internet. Xerox gave all of Apple access to ALL of their technology.

 

[dark_knight177]

http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/348

Here you go, is that an Apple Fansite too? I mean, they happen to specialize in the history of computing, which will undoubtedly make them specialists in Apple's history being the first PC manufacturer...damn, guess they don't count. Perhaps we should visit Samsung's museum of innovation (brainwashing) instead?

I don't see any references to Xerox receiving stock in exchange for PARC in that article, it could very well be written by Apple shills. By references, i mean "ACTUAL" references which reference to concrete proof at the end of the article, not just mentioning it.

 

[jlo1158]

Apple clearly stole this...yet you know so little about the Xerox PARC deal that you think Apple stole that too? FYI, Apple traded stock for Xerox's stuff, they willingly handed it over, and many employees at Apple at the time were from Xerox PARC to begin with. I don't know why people like yourself always speak as if you know what you're talking about then follow it up with "now defend that, apologists". You're flat out wrong, people are pointing it out, it might seem like defensiveness to you...because you're likely wrong all of the time considering the "facts" you just presented.

Maybe you can explain why Xerox sued Apple then.

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/15/b...-apple-computer-over-macintosh-copyright.html

 

[dark_knight177]

It's common knowledge

How is this common knowledge? You are speaking of it like it's a fact! Were you personally present when Xerox received Apple stock in exchange for PARC access? No you weren't and there's no way you can prove it.

 

[Iconoclysm]

I don't see any references to Xerox receiving stock in exchange for PARC in that article, it could very well be written by Apple shills. By references, i mean "ACTUAL" references which reference to concrete proof at the end of the article, not just mentioning it.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/05/16/creation-myth

 

[manu chao]

By the rest of the internet, you mean the rest of the Apple centric blogs? which are obviously biased?

It's funny that so many people equate 'biased' with 'lying through their teeth', not sure if you know the difference between the two. And try Wikipedia to get a reference for the Xerox stock deal with Apple.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Maybe you can explain why Xerox sued Apple then.

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/15/b...-apple-computer-over-macintosh-copyright.html

Perhaps you can explain why they lost then? I will say this, reports from people who worked at PARC but wouldn't go over to Apple were angry as hell that Xerox corporate sold off their ideas so easily. They took that with them for years, looks like about 10 years by the date of this article.

 

[dark_knight177]

And try Wikipedia to get a reference for the Xerox stock deal with Apple.

Sure, and I am sure that will reference me to macrumors.com

 

[manu chao]

How is this common knowledge? You are speaking of it like it's a fact! Were you personally present when Xerox received Apple stock in exchange for PARC access? No you weren't and there's no way you can prove it.

You know, if your burden of proof is whether you or me were physically present when something happened than 99.9999999999999% of all human knowledge is unproven.

 

[jlo1158]

Perhaps you can explain why they lost then?

Read up on it. They lost because they waited too long to sue.

 

[dark_knight177]

Perhaps you can explain why they lost then?

Loosing doesn't mean it didn't happen. Scottsboro case was lost and Scottsboro boys were put on death row even though they were innocent. Loosing a court case doesn't mean much!