3 ms·

I phrased my comment poorly. It's not only that they built something similar, it's that they built the patented tech. Hiring a team and rebuilding something th

I phrased my comment poorly. It's not only that they built something similar, it's that they built the patented tech. Hiring a team and rebuilding something that is not patented, or that skirts the edge of a patent, that's just fine. Hiring the team and building the patented thing is bad, not because of hiring the team, but because of building the patented thing. That it's the same team is just evidence that it infringes on the patent.

varispeed 3y ago
Given what is being approved as a patent these days (basically anything goes in), I wouldn't consider this as an exception. Generally speaking, the patents should describe the invention in such a way that anyone competent in the field could recreate it. So I don't see how the fact the Apple has hired that team has any relevance to this. Maybe the patents should have been invalidated too.