US ban on some Apple Watch sales now in effect

What no one&#x27;s mentioned here is: this is an International Trade Commission ruling, not a US court or PTO ruling.<p>So Apple cannot <i>import</i> those watches. They <i>could</i> probably build them in the US (now there&#x27;s a thought), and injunctions against domestic products are possible but very unusual. Usually there are damages, not injunctions.

I&#x27;ve seen tons of articles&#x2F;posts about this recently, but does anyone have any links to any good articles that describe the patent(s) in question, and what the arguments are about (a) whether this patent is truly novel (I&#x27;ve heard tons of &quot;pulse oximetry is decades old&quot; arguments, but nothing about the specifics of these patents) and (b) whether Apple is or isn&#x27;t infringing on the specific details?<p>I&#x27;m sure this kind of analysis must be out there, but I searched through a couple of posts and lots of comment threads and primarily saw a lot of conjecture but no actual references to what was really under debate.

Related:<p><i>Apple appeals US ban on Apple Watch</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38773177">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38773177</a> - Dec 2023 (83 comments)<p><i>Apple is officially no longer selling the newest Apple Watch in America</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38771436">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38771436</a> - Dec 2023 (108 comments)<p><i>Apple to Halt Watch Sales as It Prepares to Comply with U.S. Import Ban</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38684156">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38684156</a> - Dec 2023 (14 comments)<p><i>Apple to halt Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 sales in the US this week</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38682631">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38682631</a> - Dec 2023 (482 comments)<p><i>Apple Watch violates patents held by Orange Co. tech company, ITC finds</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38059668">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38059668</a> - Oct 2023 (104 comments)<p><i>Apple Faces Potential Watch Import Ban After Federal Trade Ruling</i> - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38034964">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38034964</a> - Oct 2023 (46 comments)

In the meantime, retailers like Best Buy can sell units that have already been imported to the US, and Apple can still sell the SE.<p>I wonder if Apple preemptively imported a ton of watches for resale, to give them some breathing room. I imagine the post-Christmas period is relatively slow, and they’ll likely refresh the watches in May. Would it be possible for them to stuff the resale channels with 3 months of inventory, and then just move to a new generation of watches at WWDC?

Is there a chance Apple will pay Masimo for the technology and resume sales?<p>I am curious why that didn’t happen. If this is an exec’s decision and this leads to bigger losses than paying Masimo, I wonder what would happen the people involved in the decisions.

Do the $15 pulse oximiters that can be found on Amazon also infringe on these patents?

Apple certainly isn’t a an innocent player here (they have shut down competitors with bogus patents), but that doesn’t mean the system isn’t completely broken.<p>The import ban is due to them using a technology that was invented in 1935, then improved to more or less match what Apple shipped in 1970. Ironically, the inventor from 1970 opted not to patent it. The history section of this article has a good overview: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Pulse_oximetry" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Pulse_oximetry</a><p>On top of there obviously being prior work, the “court” that blocked imports is part of an expedited process, so even though the real court will definitely consider invalidating the patent (and will probably invalidate it) that hasn’t happened yet.<p>There are good examples in this discussion of Apple using equally bogus patents to block imports, but I hope something (maybe this case) becomes a poster child for this sort of legal abuse, and leads to real reform.

There are other watches with this. Withings is FDA-approved. Garmin and Samsung have several models. There are non-Apple watches which will pair with iPhones. And there are Apple watches without a blood-oxygen sensor. No big deal.

I&#x27;m wearing a Series 9 right now. What are the chances that they have to &#x27;turn off&#x27; or &#x27;disable&#x27; the pulse oximetry function?<p>I haven&#x27;t heard that mentioned--or if it was I missed it.

I wonder if it is time to re-think the way patents work in an age of highly integrated devices. In this case, it seems like Apple and Masimo could have worked together to deliver a stellar product that promoted both inventor rights and benefited the public. Instead, both companies are suffering, and the public loses access to a technology.<p>Perhaps the public should buy the Masimo watch if they appreciate the specific advantages of the specific pulse oximetry technology at question here. While that may satisfy a small percentage of customers whose primary motive is that specific feature, the majority of people I know wouldn&#x27;t consider that a valid option, since they like the integration with the &quot;apple ecosystem&quot;, or similar reasons.<p>Would it be possible to separate end products from component technology in a way that prevents this? Perhaps by tracking an accounting line for patents internally, then pushing for legislation which requires patent-cost -&gt; end product cost transparency?

The hubris here isn’t simply about patents, it’s about entering the medical devices field. Apple has rolled over a million patents probably.<p>But the medical industry has lawyers as good as yours and bottomless pockets.

Every time I read about This I am gobsmacked by just how big a cavalier blunder this is for apple.<p>Who on gods earth at Cupertino thought the pittance you could save from sherlocking would somehow be more than the revenue from a new iPhone in 2023?<p>Now you&#x27;ve either got to pay the license or buy the damn company. And you STILL had to admit to wrongdoing in front of the ITC and the world. Any acquisition you seek from now on is going to be a pretty cold reception if anyone cares at all to entertain it.<p>I wager masimo will license this technology out to every competitor apple has until cooks pushing daisies and then open source it out of spite...or at least thats what I&#x27;d do ;)

[dupe]<p>More here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38771436">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=38771436</a>

I was wondering if there was going to be this huge influx of demand, like beanie babies or NFTs.

I am worried, but not for apple. I am worried for those poor souls so fixated on apple’s products that they may not even try using a competing product. What will they do now? Where will they shop and consume? There will be no presents with the apple logo, nothing to post about on linkedin, nothing to be proud of, nothing to wear to show the world the product they love and crave. What if Tesla is next? Or openai? What if they will all he crushed by patent holders, or rent seekers. Truly there must be something we can do. Abolish patents maybe? Civil war? UBI? Musk and Tim save us. Or since this is due to “President Joe Biden’s administration refused” maybe Trump will provide relief. Remains to be seen whom the hungry, angry, frightened, masses of consumers will chose as their leader to free them from the burden of small businesses oppressing corporations with their vicious patents.

Karma:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.zdnet.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;apple-gets-u-s-ban-on-htc-android-phones-sales-for-now&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.zdnet.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;apple-gets-u-s-ban-on-htc-andr...</a>

Apple loves to bully competitors and suppliers with both patents and app store. I doubt being on the other end of this will make them change their behaviour.

Live by the patent, die by the patent.<p>No sympathy deserved or earned.