Apple Watch ban: 5 events that got Apple into this predicament | Mashable.
Apple Watch ban: 5 events that got Apple into this predicament
 |
| Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 9 are banned. How did we get here? Credit: Stan Schroeder/Mashable |
When I first heard about the potential Apple Watch ban in early February, thanks to The Hill, I thought, "There's no way that one of the most popular smartwatches on the planet would get barred."
Even The Verge was skeptical: "Given the Apple Watch’s popularity and the size of Apple’s coffers, it’ll be surprising if an import ban actually materializes," adding that it's more likely that Masimo, the medical-tech company that sued Apple, will walk away with a licensing agreement.
But here we are. It's the end of 2023 and Apple is now banned from selling its latest wearables: Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2.
But the question is, how did we get here?
5 major events that led to the Apple Watch ban
Jan. 2020. Masimo first sued Apple, according to Bloomberg. The med-tech company accused Apple of promising a partnership (both companies reportedly met in 2013 to discuss a working relationship) — only to turn its back on Masimo by stealing trade secrets and hiring key employees.
Sept. 2020. Apple introduced the Watch Series 6, which boasted a new blood-oxygen monitoring feature, a technology Masimo claims Apple stole from the med-tech company.
In the same month, Masimo accused Apple of trying to delay and postpone the legal fight. For background, by this time, Apple already filed requests to dismiss the trade secrets accusation and filed petitions to have Masimo's patents invalidated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
June 2021. Masimo filed a complaint to the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), hoping that it would pull the Apple Watch from the market. In short, the complaint claims that Apple infringed upon several patents by releasing a watch that can measure arterial oxygen saturation.
Oct. 2023. The ITC ruled in favor of Masimo, stating that Apple did, indeed, violate Masimo's patents that protected its blood-oxygen monitoring inventions. The ITC issued an import ban, taking effect on Dec. 26, on the devices that include the technology (i.e., Watch Series 9 and Watch Ultra 2).
Dec. 2023. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representatives under the Biden administration could have stepped in to veto the ban, but on Dec. 26, it decided against reversing the ITC's ruling, according to The Hill.
So what now?
According Bloomberg, Apple will challenge the ban at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. "We strongly disagree with the USITC decision and resulting exclusion order, and are taking all measures to return Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 to customers in the US as soon as possible," an Apple spokesperson said.
On Tuesday, Apple also requested an emergency removal of the ban for a minimum of two weeks while the court mulls over Apple's appeal.
Topics Apple Apple Watch
Just pay the innovators already.
ReplyDeleteThat’s assuming that:
DeleteA - the patents will remain valid
B - that Apple can’t come up with something that doesn’t violate the patent.
Yes, but if they come up with something that doesn't violate the patent, I would still find it fair for them to pay damages for the period during which they did violate the patent - if it remains valid. The problem is it is often cheaper for big companies to steal intellectual property than to licence it or acquire it, especially if the other company is a small operation. The solution would be to make it prohibitively more expensive, which I'm hoping this case will do, for once. IMO, the bigger the size difference between two companies, the bigger the damages.
DeleteThe question is how much is the blood oxygen sensor actually worth for the Apple Watch, its not the singular focus of the product so paying out all the profits from Apple Watches is not reasonable so it becomes a question of how much did the blood oxygen sensor push people to buy the Apple Watch, For me when the series 6 came out I was ready for an upgrade anyways so I was buying it regardless of a blood oxygen sensor so for me it didn't play into buying the watch. So if its too difficult to figure out how much the sensor played in the buying decision then you can factor how much of the experience is effected by the blood oxygen sensor, which honestly isn't that much, you can get a reading and it does some readings in the background during sleep tracking but during day to day use your often not even still enough for it to get a reading.
DeleteA big part of damages is if the infringement caused damages, ie people buying the Apple Watch over the Masimo watch, this is generally where you can get the big bucks, the problem of course is I don't know a single person who even knew about the Masimo watch so that's a harder claim.
In the end it all comes down to how important is the blood oxygen sensor to sales and how would sales be effected if it wasn't included. If Masimo can't prove that the blood oxygen sensor is a critical part of the product they're going to have a harder time getting a lot in damages. Punitive damages may be easier, that is if they actually win the case.
That took a strange turn. Apple clearly poached employees and then violated patents. Why ask if President Biden should stop the ban? Apple should write an enormous check and make this problem go away, and make Masimo whole.
ReplyDeleteThat kind of outcome will never happen unless the FTC crawls up Apple's proverbial "legal input channel" with lawsuits and consequences bearing actual teeth. Corporations represent power, and power respects power, and nothing else.
DeleteApple’s going to lose. The Supreme Court, albeit with two members themselves being corrupt thieves, won’t allow somebody to just out and out steal somebody else’s technology.
DeletePresident Obama has bailed out Apple from their legal woes before from the ITC, he did it in the year 2013.
DeleteAnd Obama refused to do the same when the situation was reversed. Talking about rule of law and stuff.
DeleteCongress makes laws not the ITC.
DeleteAn enabler for and beneficiary of the sociopathic global gangster capitalists . . . he was very much what they all "hoped" for, and indeed got.
DeleteApple expects Biden pulling an Obama, and hopefully not getting one at the last minute.
DeleteThe article fails to mention that the watch costs $47,999
DeleteBecause you say so? It hasn't been proven Apple violated Masimo's patents or that Masimo's patents are valid. This article is misleading.
DeleteI love Apple products - but they are utterly wrong here.
ReplyDeleteBig corporations have a very bad habit of believing that they can just brute-force smaller companies using the methods described in the article or just outright theft against a company that has fewer litigation options.
As much as I like Apple, I hope President Biden stays out of it, and makes them take the "L" here. They have plenty of money to settle and/or buy the technology from the little guy.
I really don’t see why Biden would interfere, but this isn’t the first article I’ve seen suggesting he might.
DeleteYeah, that is the only reason I mentioned it.
DeleteIt's because Obama vetoed an ITC ban, but that was not an American company.
Deletevs. Samsung
DeleteMight or should? Not against you but against media narrative building.
DeleteInnovation at Apple was given a terminal diagnosis the day Steve Jobs died and finally flat-lined when Johnny Ive left the company. Now they are just another conglomerate that „innovates“ by buying—or stealing from—truly innovative companies, as is the case here. I use Apple products all the time, but I honestly cannot recall any real innovation coming out of Apple during the past 10 years.
DeleteI Agree 💯
DeleteWhat big tech companies such as Apple do is something called "efficient infringement." They calculate whether it is more profitable to license the technology or steal it. If they license, they pay a certain amount. If they steal it, they calculate whether the real owner has the resources and time to fight a lawsuit or an ITC challenge. If not, they steal. Apple miscalculated in this case. Their saving grace is they can take all these products and sell them in other nations where the ITC order does not exist.
ReplyDeleteApple needs a good slap down.
DeleteIt gets old when they constantly tout themselves as innovators -- of other people's ideas.
DeleteI've been a good Apple customer since my very first iPhone in 2011, but that part always gets to me, too.
DeleteApple has not been innovative since the original iPhone (whose basic design was also lifted off of other companies' ideas).
Apple is a great integrator -- that's it. They write excellent software that work really well with their custom hardware (again, also based on other companies' novel designs but ones which they legally license unlike with this oxy-meter theft), but they always wait for others -- mainly the Android phone makers like Samsung, LG and Google -- to innovate and do the hard incremental work while they take their sweet time to roll out the same thing a few years later (always late, but usually with great execution).
Many here are commenting on how silly the functions of the Apple Watch are or the “smugness” of Apple users.
ReplyDeleteMany, like myself, who suffer from heart conditions and/or chronic illness, rely heavily on these functions. There isn’t another device that logs HR, SpO2, ECG & has a fall alarm which will alert EMS in the event of a fall leaving the wearer unresponsive.
For those fortunate enough to have good health rendering these functions “bells & whistles”, good for you. But many of us with serious health conditions rely on this data for our everyday safety and health.
I don’t defend Apple’s conduct in the theft of this technology, but people should be aware that a lot of us wear these devices out of necessity not bc we can text on it or play with apps. I’m grateful to have it and it totally changed my day-to-day living once I got it.
Well then you should be upset with Apple who clearly knew what they were doing.
DeleteHe is upset: "I don’t defend Apple’s conduct in the theft of this technology, ..."
DeleteThat's the main reason Im considering coughing up the money for one. Fell once 2 years ago, dislocated my hip. Thank god my phone was on the coffee table where I had to agonizingly crawl to to try to get help. A friend recently had a stroke and her watch monitors her vitals and reminds her to get up and walk
DeleteAt the end of the article it states that the feature can be inaccurate.
DeleteHence, if you rely on it, you will need a backup and whatever backup you have will have to be portable and travel well.
Otherwise, you may find yourself in the hospital for no reason:
"Well doc, my watch told me I am sick, so here I am".
I’ve used this watch during my 3-years of illness. I’ve tested it repeatedly against my own 3 pulse oximeters & during every visit to the hospital. It has been accurate during every comparison. My cardiologist and pulmonologist concur.
DeleteIt has twice alerted me to dangerous symptoms, both of which landed me in the hospital and had I not gone when I did, I wouldn’t be sitting here today.
My day, like many others with chronic illness or disability, is structured around doling out energy based on an activity’s tax on my heart and body. Without this piece of equipment, I’d be in the dark about trends of activities that are causing dangerous spikes in arrhythmia and dips in blood oxygen levels. Am I able to climb the stairs now to fold laundry or do I need to rest & wait? If my HR has been in a dangerous zone for several minutes, it’s the latter. This is how I make decisions on every activity, every day, large or small.
The accumulated data of spikes and resting heart rate and SpO2 shows trends that help me and my doctors make other decisions on the effectiveness of treatments and/or medications.
Respectfully, it’s a bit frustrating for assumingly healthy and able-bodied people to tell those living with illness and disability that a piece of equipment they rely on so heavily for safety and measurement of their body’s ability to perform day-to-day activities many take for granted, is unnecessary and inaccurate.
I don't have any Apple products yet I have a great life. How is this possible?
ReplyDeleteYou are missing out. /s
DeleteiAgree
Delete^ Well done 😆
DeleteMe either. Not even iTunes.
DeleteApple ended iTunes 2019-2020
DeleteI guess they didn't need it either! : )
DeleteI have iTunes on my PC desktop right now. Sunday I used it to backup my phone and my tablet, move some books onto the iPad and listen to U2. Your mileage may vary.
DeleteFunny I used Itunes earlier today and an ipod touch.
DeleteApple products are great. They do complex tasks simply and reliably. They work with each other and they last a long, long time. Their support services are the best of any I have used. And, I have been a customer since the mid-1980s.
DeleteThe problem is Apple vastly overcharges for these products and I think and court cases suggest that it has in the past taken the technology of others. Unfortunately, so do all their competitors. Ultimately, the problem is not with these giant corporations but with a Federal Government that is unwilling to enforce anti-monopoly and fair trade laws that have long been law. It is the wild West out there.
At the end of the article it states that the feature can be inaccurate. That is not "great" or "reliable".
DeleteDo not speak of such blasphemy!
DeleteOn a more serious note, most children who get smartphones from their parents, really don't need them.
I think you need an Apple watch to get into Disney.
DeleteI love it. I hate Apple. I ran into people who used their products years ago and learned that they thought they were better than you because they could afford Apple's overpriced products. They slowed down their overpriced phones to force people to buy a new one. The fact that Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos loved him and copied his methods should have told everyone what kind of creepy person she was.
ReplyDeleteGreat! Amazon and Musk next!!!
Unfortunate that you had such experience with Apple folks. I'm an Apple person and certainly don't look down on anyone else based on the tech they use. As proof, I drive a Ford and wouldn't ever drive a BMW just for prestige. I just happen to enjoy how everything in the Apple universe works. As to tech giants ruling the world, this only works if their stuff works and makes our lives better. That's why we continue to buy and use from them.
DeleteWaiting for a watch that monitors blood sugar accurately.
ReplyDeleteApple has more money than god - they should just pay for the technology they appropriated via a license. They can afford it.
ReplyDeleteHealthcare should not be a for-profit venture.
ReplyDeleteOn a different note, my husband who has Parkinson's, wears an apple watch. This program is used for him and his neurologist. The watch records his tremors and dyskinesis. His neurologist uses it to see what times during his day that his tremors and dyskinesis are worse or better.
ReplyDeleteThis is valuable information so she can determine either to increase or decrease his meds and or increase or decrease his DBS program. We are very thankful for that.
Why would you reward Apple for its unethical behaviour?
ReplyDeleteIt means nothing whatever to me.
ReplyDeleteApple got Samsung to pay up for rounded edges. Live by the sword...
ReplyDeleteFunny Biden. Biden need an Apple watch. If he falls again the watch will cal 911. He needs two
ReplyDelete😂😂😂😂😂😂
DeleteDon't believe Biden is as lame as your sad attempt at humor.
DeleteIsn’t trump the one glued to his phone? Oh right- he doesn’t walk, that would reduce his lifetime energy supply.
DeleteMy watch is great. I use it to tell people to leave me alone
ReplyDeleteThe Apple Watch has a pulse oximeter as part of the device. The Masimo is separate pulse oximeter hardware with software that has to be paired with apple devices (not an Apple watch). I don't see how they are at all the same. Does Omron, makers of a blood pressure cuff that syncs data to a computer or phone app have the right to sue for Apple Watch's ability to monitor blood pressure? I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteOk expert, but the judgement went against Apple. Corporate bullying and theft of secrets is what they did.
DeleteIt's an opinion, Dude. And it's not over.
DeleteYou work for the geek squad.
DeleteBut rounded edges are a totally legit patent, right?
DeleteApple has never cooperated with other companies, but instead had been propriatory with closed systems that add to expense and create hassles when you try to integrate systems. I'm not a fan.
ReplyDeleteThe last company to challenge Apple regarding Apple Watch patents ended up having its patents invalidated on review. The same thing could happen to Masimo.
ReplyDeleteMasimo already got some patents invalidated because of its lawsuit.
DeleteApple was predatory and they got caught. Their behavior cannot be condoned, since IP theft is what countries such as China and others like to do.
ReplyDeleteApple should have licensed the patent, paid a royalty for each watch sold with the Masimo tech, and this wouldn’t have been an issue. But they thought they would win by force. They didn’t. And Biden will not opt into save Apple…nor should he.
The issue is not resolved. This order, similar to a temporary restraint, provides a reason for the patents to be reviewed. The resolution could still be in Apple's favor.
DeleteWow - a big tech giant from Apple with its legions of well-paid tech developers, silver tongued management and smooth brand advertising...
ReplyDelete... and yet they are just a bunch of thieves.
Why blame the homeless for petty theft when corporate titans do it as a matter of course.
Thank you, Mr. Grinch, no watch for u
DeleteApple should have offered to either buy, or lease the technology. They can CERTAINLY afford it. Longterm, it would have saved on legal bills AND poor publicity.
ReplyDeleteI have a lot of Apple products. but I cannot hide my disappointment for the behavior of this giant toward a small legitimate inventor. And as an inventor, myself feel frustrated how easy it would be to bypass the patent protection. Surely Apple has scientists that can solve the issue inventing their own gadget, otherwise where is Apple's genius?
ReplyDeletemore importantly, here's what it means to apple: mad rush at christmastime to snatch up the soon-to-be-maybe-gone latest apple watch. guess sales weren't meeting expectations, so they needed to boost things a bit. this should do it!
ReplyDeleteAs I read the article, I am thinking being an American president is complicated, one minute Biden is dealing with multiple wars and their ramifications, while dealing with Putin sent/installed enemies from within (today's GOP,) the economy, the climate, protecting democracy,....... and this Apple Watch shenanigan. Dmn, that is a lot.
ReplyDeleteThat is why being the president is requires more than age, polls, being the loudest loudmouth, or whatever Putin wants.