Technology

37695 readers

255 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

155

Apple is now banned from selling its latest Apple Watches in the US (www.theverge.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

They registered it over 10 years ago. [...] or did they see and copy it?

You can see patents once they get published, not when the provisional claim gets filed... so no, Apple could not see and copy it.

Apple just magically come up with the same idea

According to Masimo, Apple lured some engineers from Masimo to develop a solution... that happened to be similar enough that Masimo could file, and this time publish a patent after the fact that made Apple infringe it.

a lot of people ready to defend the big multi-billion dollar corp.

Even more people look at the finger and miss the Moon of a broken patent aystem.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

There are generally 2 ways patents get infringed.

The first is some little guy comes to market, a competitor sees their product, and figures they can out-lawyer them in court. A great example is Fox pealess whistles. A variant of this is hiring experts who previously worked on patented or patentable material and having them copy the work without following reverse engineering practices in order to make sure you don't violate your previous employer's patents.

The second one is a patent troll gets an overly broad patent where anyone else doing work in the industry is going to infringe, mostly because the patent fails the obviousness test or there is prior art that the patent examiner isn't aware of. The SCO patents generally fall under this (as well as MS patenting Windows in the context of computers, Apple with their rounded rectangles, and others I can't bother to remember.

There are relatively rare cases where two inventors come up with the same idea to solve a problem (the flushing toilet is one) or someone reads filed patents and decides to copy the method directly, rather than obtaining the results using a different process.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

That's even worse. When they're hiring multiple devs from there, they cannot claim they didn't know it existed. Also, if the product actually exists, they don't need to see a patent filing to copy it...