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.
Pulse Oximetry Company Masimo Wants the Apple Watch Series 6 Banned
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unless their patent says “Only valid for true medical devices,” the classification of the device is not relevant.
NDAs and NCAs clauses are just a way for ****** companies to scare and keep workers working for them. They should be illegal.
If you want to keep talent, treat your employees decently. Not saying Masimo does not; but the very definition of capitalism should be upheld if that is the market style you believe in.
Company A should not be able to prevent employee A from moving to Company B and using their knowledge. It is one thing to outright copy. But this is the sticky part in tech; employee A has a certain way of doing things, should Company A be able to enforce employee A not to operate at Company B the way employee A likes to work?
I think it's a slippery slope, because employee A is taking knowledge and information learned at company A...on company A's R&D money and bringing it to company B
As I recall from the last time this firm came up, key to their argument seems to be Apple poaching engineers and possibly trade secrets from them. I don’t know how applicable those trade secrets would even be in this case, because Massimo’s bread and butter is transmissive pulse oximetry, and the Apple Watch uses reflective pulse oximetry. I’d imagine that reflective pulse oximetry would require almost a completely different set of algorithms and techniques than transmissive pulse oximetry, and most firms wouldn’t even bother with reflective pulse oximetry when they could just slap a sensor in a band and get more accurate data. (Apple uses reflective pulse oximetry for whatever reason it is that they’ve never pursued any of their patents on smart bands.)
Edit: The patents on the basics of transmissive pulse oximetry have got to be expired by now, pulse oximetry in the form used by the clip on pulse oximeters has been around since the 60s or 70s. Any patents this firm has must be on advanced algorithms for better readings or for data manipulation/processing, and the former likely doesn’t work at all for reflective pulse oximetry.
Last edited:
I’m not sure the profile pic is meant to be anything other than jest (it has text on it that says “steroids badz” or something like that). Besides, this is an ad hominem argument anyway.
Plus, that “do not believe in science” bit seems suspect to me, since in a world where news and opinion is filtered through social media and sound bites. (People’s spoken statements get mischaracterized by media and social media all the time, so I’m not terribly inclined to accept second or third hand statements about people’s beliefs that I hear online.) If I had a dollar for each time someone mischaracterized the words of someone else online and someone parroted the mischaracterization, Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos would be my personal slaves. I don’t know who the profile picture is a picture of, but short of someone saying on public record something to the extent of “I don’t believe in science, instead I believe in [X]”, I’d tend not to believe it. Too many people say “you’re denying science” when, in reality, the person may not have an issue with science or the scientific method, but with some specific field within science, or even the more soft sciences. Without primary sources, it’s all too easy to put words in people’s mouths these days, especially people unpopular with the Reddit and social media set.
I’m just telling you that your argument isn’t all that strong of one, you might want to re-think it. Also, I don’t see anything about the quoted post that would amount to a “scientific argument”. Sure you didn’t quote the wrong post or something? Or it could be that I’m feeding a troll, I don’t think it would be the first time for that.
That is correct now. It’s not just Awatch either but it’s the biggest smartwatch in the market so far.
Trust me, people could need it to breath yet if acme company sued Apple for watch band infringement, there’d be a hysterical vocal contingent on here screaming Apple must!! turn off all the Awatches now!!
It could happen on every item and maybe will. The bigger you are the more legality there will be to get in on the profit. It’s just the way it is. Anyone denying that is not taking even a minute to learn that.
A civil lawsuit is literally proof of nothing other than a civil lawsuit was filed. while For some it’s all the proof they need yet hopefully that is not the norm for most.
I know someone who checked into a hospital with COVID-19… a visit they made based on their pulse ox reading from their Apple Watch. So I am saying it’s complete BS that the watch is not vital to public health and welfare, even though it is not a medical device.🍸😼
Wait, do Patton trolls command armies of sockpuppets?
(I suspect the word you’re looking for is “patents”, but I couldn’t resist a joke about George S Patton trolls.)
Because as the adage goes, an apple a day keeps the doc away.
I'll probably not pick sides even then.
There have been cases where the judge simply said, if you care so much about your non-compete clause then you can pay them to not work until it expires.
Why didn't Masimo go after a small vendor first, win that case on the basis of more $$$ for lawyers, and then use that won case to go after Apple?
Last edited:
I love how most people in this thread completely ignores this post that actually have the links to the relevant information to the case and just blurt out unconditional support for Apple.
Or the company believes they can make it worth Apples while to settle. Or they believe they might be able to convince a judge/jury they have a case even if they don’t.
Or they want to use this as leverage to get Apple (or someone else) to buy them out.
Genuine belief is only one of many reasons people/companies file lawsuits.
Yeah no.
First, it’s seldom one person inventing something.
Second, you don’t have to be the person who invented it to take that knowledge with you.
Third, if I provide you with the resources and materials to invent something, and pay you a salary while you work on it, for the purpose of using it for my company, why should I get nothing? It would become impossible to build something like the iPhone under your model because at any time someone who “owns” one part could leave and take their “invention” with them.
Its not necessary to completely upend IP law to treat employees better, and doing so would almost certainly not result in that anyway. The people who are treated the worst in the economy are seldom the ones involved in that high level of product development to begin with. You think a factory worker at Amazon is going to gain any benefit from your proposed system? Tech employees are already some of the best paid, most well treated there are. This isn’t where changes need to be made.
It’s entirely possible for both to be a true.
Qualifying as a medical grade device requires jumping through various regulatory hoops, beyond what Apple has already done for the existing functions of the Apple Watch.
A device that hasn’t done so could still be utilizing patented technology or ideas.
Just because I build a device that doesn’t play games doesn’t mean I can’t violate a patent owned by Nintendo for example.
Well, as someone who has a respiratory disorder, I love the pulse/ox feature. I know it's not "medical grade" but I've compared it consistently against my dedicated pulse/ox device (that is registered as a medical device) and they are so close that I don't even use the old device any longer. Yes, I still have it if I I need it for some reason. But I feel it's pretty important to my health, despite what this company says.
Secondly, why isn't this company going after Samsung, Garmin and Fitbit (now owned by Google), which also uses light in their smart watches to get pulse/ox measurements? I just don't see them banning a watch that's been on sale for nearly a year when so many other companies and watches also have that same tech. It would be a mess.
Secondly, why isn't this company going after Samsung, Garmin and Fitbit (now owned by Google), which also uses light in their smart watches to get pulse/ox measurements? I just don't see them banning a watch that's been on sale for nearly a year when so many other companies and watches also have that same tech. It would be a mess.
This expounds on the mess I was thinking would exist. How do you ban Apple Watches when Garmin, Samsung, Fitbit/Google all use the same tech and, with what you're sharing, any number of cheap knock-offs on Amazon. I just don't see how it's doable.
If you're asking about the Apple Watch, yes, they are. I've compared to my medically registered pulse/ox device and it's neck and neck on the readings. If yours is saying 98 most of the time, it's probably that your readings are just that level when it's checking.
FWIW, I have a rare respiratory disorder and I've often had it dipping down into the low 90s, even upper 80s. So, it will register lower readings.
1. You can list more than one person on a patent.
2. Exactly.
3. This is the problem that needs addressing. If you pay me to discover something then you got access to the solution. You don't own the solution because all you did was provide resources. Your contribution is the bare minumum and deserves little protection. The idea that some products couldn't exist is absurd. Of course, they could, it would just mean working to ensure that the people who did the work - can take their efforts elsewhere, and now you can have two iPhones. My solution makes the engineers the highest-paid employees.
4. This isn't about factory workers, and no one said it was. But, the people treated the worst right now are the people inventing things. They are being told that their salary is sufficent compensation. That's absurd.
Its not necessary to completely upend IP law to treat employees better, but it would result it them being treated better. Since the entire Concept of IP needs to be fixed why not also make it better for the people doing the actual work?
The problem I see is that the people who run these companies are so entitled they think they own the ideas their employees come up with just because they paid them. That's thinking needs to go. So does the idea that companies themselves are people. If the executives want to make more money then they can contribute and get their names on the patent as well. Many of them do. But they shouldn't be able to stop an employee from getting up and going to their competitor and taking all their IP with them. Executives would be better served reducing turnover.
Last edited: