13 ms·
All these intellectual property lawsuits look like an economic loss overall. The laws don’t work as intended if they aimed to encourage innovation
by gxyt6gfy5t 3y ago
All these intellectual property lawsuits look like an economic loss overall. The laws don’t work as intended if they aimed to encourage innovation
- lotsoweiners 3y agoSure but on the other hand as someone with a pretty recent Apple Watch on my wrist I am very happy whenever Apple suffers a loss and loses money.
- stingrae 3y ago"I am very happy whenever Apple suffers a loss and loses money" That is a bizarre take.
- Jtsummers 3y agoIt is a bizarre take, see also the train wreck of a discussion about Beeper and Apple.
- slily 3y ago[flagged]
- smoldesu 3y agoYou can't pretend that Apple doesn't set themselves up for the criticism. They're the largest company globally, completely control all major facets of their devices and struggle to admit to adamant and obvious design failure (eg. Butterfly Keyboard, anti-repair DRM, single-vendor App Store, browser lockdown, etc.). When Apple is wrong, fixing the problem yourself isn't always an option. Reactions like this shouldn't surprise you if you've seen what HN has to say about Meta, Microsoft and Google.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pb7 3y agoApple products are so much better than the competition that even their haters buy them.
- rpmisms 3y agoI hate what Apple has become, but they make the best laptops, so I buy them.
- iamacyborg 3y agoGarmin watches are still substantially better, imo.
- jojobas 3y agoThe laws are supposed to reward Masimo for their innovation by Apple paying them an appropriate licensing fee. Apple decided to circumvent that by milking them for IP in a feigned acquisition attempt and then headhunting their engineers and are going to be punished financially for not rewarding innovation. The law is working as intended.
- notatoad 3y agoright, but it sure looks like masimo's "innovation" is filing the patent paperwork for the general concept of how pulse oximeters have always worked, not anything new they invented. filing patents for something you didn't invent is not the law working as intended.
- jojobas 3y agoIf that was the case Apple would have overturned this patent on the basis of prior art. I'm inclined to trust ITC on this one more than a random dude from the internet, even though he is not a toad.
- photonbeam 3y agoOr, the system itself has become just stupid
- kelnos 3y agoMaybe so, but just because darling-child Apple is the one on the wrong end of a lawsuit, it doesn't mean there's no merit.
- t0mas88 3y agoIf that was the only innovation, why would Apple go and have several meetings with them and then try to hire their engineers? Sounds like they had something that Apple wanted, and Apple decided not to pay for it. This case is the result, which certainly will be settled at some point.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bamboozled 3y agoThis is why we need more AI, it makes it easier to never pay anyone royalties again, this in-turn will boost economic prosperity for all corporations.
- bmitc 3y agoBy the same token, all these patents these megacorps apply for are also an economic loss. They're part of the problem.
- Synaesthesia 3y agoWhat they do is uphold the U.S. global monopoly on high tech products.
- Vt71fcAqt7 3y ago>U.S. global monopoly on high tech products Right, using US companies such as Samsung, TSMC, Sony, MediaTek...
- Synaesthesia 3y agoApple, Intel, Microsoft, Facebook, Google …
- Vt71fcAqt7 3y agoWhich patents do Facebook and Google use? Those companies are based on network effects and custom algorithms (not patented). I'll give you that Intel and AMD are coasting on their x86 patents. I'd add Qualcomm as well. Not sure about Apple and Microsoft. They are more based on copyright (ie. source code) although I may be wrong. In any case this is a far cry from a "U.S. global monopoly on high tech products."