• jarfil ( jarfil@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          3 years ago

          The trolling comes from stuff like this:


          “Non-invasive physiological sensor cover”
          US US11779247B2 Abraham Mazda Kiani Masimo Corporation

          • Priority 2009-07-29
          • Filed 2022-12-20
          • Granted 2023-10-10
          • Published 2023-10-10

          They were fine with selling their own watch in a “patent pending” state over 10 years after having filed a provisional application, but the moment Apple announced their own watch, they hurried to write a final application after the fact worded in a way that would make Apple infringe on it thanks to having a 10+ year old priority on it.

          They’ve been pulling the same stunt a bunch of times:

          https://patents.google.com/?assignee=Masimo&oq=Masimo&sort=new

          Several 2023 patents, have a priority as far back as 2006!

          • derbis ( derbis@beehaw.org ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            3 years ago

            Why does this constitute trolling, though? That means they actually did invent and produce the tech for that whole period, doesn’t it? I could understand filling a provisional patent and then only pulling the trigger on the whole shebang when you actually have to protect it.

              • jarfil ( jarfil@beehaw.org ) 
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                3 years ago

                Apple fanboys gonna fanboy.

                I will kindly ask you to retract that insult. I have never owned, paid for, rented, or otherwise let any Apple products into my life, don’t own any AAPL, and definitely are not a fan of Apple’s shenanigans.

                these 10 years of court cases

                What are you talking about?

                  • jarfil ( jarfil@beehaw.org ) 
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 years ago

                    This is not a vote, these are facts you can check yourself:

                    • Between 2006 and 2022: Massimo kept building a portfolio of “provisional filings”, without filing a final version that would get published
                    • 2022: Massimo launches its own watch, still without having filed for final patents
                    • later in 2022: Apple announces a watch with similar functionality
                    • shortly after Apple’s announcement: suddenly Massimo decides to file final versions of a slew of patents it had kept in the “provisional” stage for 15+ years

                    There is no counter-argument.

            • jarfil ( jarfil@beehaw.org ) 
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              3 years ago

              I could understand filling a provisional patent and then only pulling the trigger on the whole shebang when you actually have to protect it.

              That is trolling.

              Patents are intended as a social contract:

              • An inventor: gets a limited time monopoly to sell their invention
              • Everyone else: gets to see how they did it, then get to do it for free once the monopoly time expires

              Filing claims and keeping them hidden, then rewording them for publication when “you actually have to protect it”, is trolling.

              • derbis ( derbis@beehaw.org ) 
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                3 years ago

                Patent trolling is buying up patents from their actual inventors for the purpose of suing and extorting money from companies that actually make use of the tech, while not actually doing anything productive with them.

                Two facts here: 1) they invented the tech, and 2) they used the invention to legitimately produce items for sale.

                Trolling is not a fit for this.

                • jarfil ( jarfil@beehaw.org ) 
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  They kept provisional filings on hold for over 15 years, released their own product without filing for the actual patent, and only did so after a competitor announced their own product.

                  If you don’t want to call it “trolling”, what do you call “abusing the patent process to keep competitors unaware of pending patents that can be used against them retroactively”? What would be a shorter word for that?