posted in Technology
Apple Ordered to Pay $5.7 Billion for Infringing Haptics Patent in iPhone, Apple Watch
www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-5-billion-dollars-haptics-patent-iphone-apple-watch/posted in Technology
Apple Ordered to Pay $5.7 Billion for Infringing Haptics Patent in iPhone, Apple Watch
www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-5-billion-dollars-haptics-patent-iphone-apple-watch/Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
Its always nice to find good news in my feed
Replying to @Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world
How is this good news? Haptic feedback has existed since the 1970s. This patent should be invalid.
Replying to @reddig33@lemmy.world
Even if it’s like catching Al capone on tax fraud, it’s still good to get the baddie.
Replying to @Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
Rewarding a patent troll is never a good thing. It just means no one will be able to use haptic feedback without paying a toll.
Replying to @reddig33@lemmy.world
Are they really a patent troll though? It’s apparently a headphone company.
Replying to @timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
They have one headphone license for one model from crossair, that is worth less money that what they spent on lawyers for this trial. They are a patent troll.
Replying to @reddig33@lemmy.world
The patent is not on haptic feedback. The patent is on a very specific means of implementing haptic feedback using ferrofluids and electromagnetic actuators that it is claimed (and Apple deemed it good enough to copy, so presumably truly) allows for both a smaller implementation than typical mechanical haptic feedback (i.e. the off-balance-flywheel approach of phones of old), while also allowing for low- or zero- noise compared to “speaker or piezo” based haptic feedback.
There are a lot of shit patents in the world, but on a surface reading at least this seems sufficiently novel that I don’t see why it should be invalid. One also presumes that if Apple had any grounds to invalidate it on prior-art they would have done so.
Replying to @timochka@lemmy.zip
So I looked into this and you are right and I am wrong. Deleting my previous posts since there’s more to this case than just haptics.
Replying to @reddig33@lemmy.world
Well, all credit to you!
Sometimes Lemmy can be surprising in a good way :^).
Replying to @Eat_Your_Paisley@lemmy.world
Dumb. Ignorant. Moron.
Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
For perspective, the watch division makes between $35 to $40 billion annually.
Replying to @Pika@sh.itjust.works
Holy cow…
Replying to @Pika@sh.itjust.works
Crazy, I dont think it is all because of the haptics though. This seems like a noteworthy amount for them
Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
It would be cheaper to just assasinate the lawyers and the other party.
Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
By the time Apple pays this, assuming they do. They will have made at least that much in extra profits from the original $5.7 billion by investing it.
Replying to @kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Sure, but they also have to pay interest on the balance starting at the moment the judgement was entered.
Replying to @FauxLiving@lemmy.world
Only having to pay the interest of 5.7 billion sounds like a better deal, no?
Replying to @kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com
On one hand, you could almost certainly earn a higher return than the court requires you to pay in interest… but, if you had 5.7 billion dollars to invest in that kind of play then a plaintiff would likely succeed in getting a court order to force you to pay.
Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
Every single feature is being patented, it’s ridiculous.
Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
Would be nice if the article had a link to the patent. Seems like a little journalistic effort would be worth it.
Replying to @TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com
Patents have become nothing more than a legal pretense for extortion. The system should absolutely be abolished as it currently stands.