Apple To Remove Blood-Oxygen Tool To Avoid Ban, Masimo Says

Apple is removing a blood-oxygen feature from its latest smartwatches -- the Series 9 and Ultra 2 -- to get around a US ban stemming from a patent dispute with Masimo. From a report: The disclosure was made Monday by Masimo, which said that US Customs and Border Protection approved the change on Jan. 12. The agency "decided that Apple's redesign falls outside the scope" of an import ban by the US International Trade Commission, signaling that the adjustment will let Apple keep its watches on the market.

The ITC had ruled in October that Apple's devices violated Masimo patents related to blood-oxygen measurement. That led Apple to pause sales of the smartwatches just ahead of Christmas, though an interim stay allowed the company to bring the products back late last month. The iPhone maker developed a software workaround intended to sidestep the dispute and presented the solution last week to the customs agency, which is in charge of enforcing import bans. Apple explained that the redesigned watches "definitively" do not contain the technology at issue, known as pulse oximetry, according to Masimo.

Masimo

[Valgrus Thunderaxe]

They're clearly not a patent troll [amazon.com] and they made, what I feel, were several reasonable attempts to come to agreement with Apple.

Re:

[hdyoung]

You’re absolutely right that Masimo is the real deal. They have a whole line of pulse oximetry products, and half a dozen other types of medical systems. All or mostly approved medical devices.

This seems like a fine resolution. Apple and Masimo couldn’t come to an agreement, so they keep to their own IP-defined turf. It’s a slight loss for consumers. In 10-20 years, Masimo IP will go off-patent and the tech will show up in every smartwatch moving forward.

I’m generally an Appl

Re:

[saloomy]

I am not up to speed on this technology, so genuinely asking. Are the Masimo patents legitimately how Apple does blood oxygen detection, or did Apple arrive on that sensor tech on its own? Why didnt Apple just buy sensors from Masimo if they work the same way? Are the patents FRAND, and Apple was just greedy? I have an Ultra watch, love the blood oxygen sensor.

Re:Masimo

[nicubunu]

Apple poached [slashdot.org] Masimo enginers and used their knowledge to develop a competing product

Re:

[drinkypoo]

Apple poached Masimo enginers and used their knowledge to develop a competing product

Humans are not deer; they are not eggs; they are not being killed without a permit nor lightly, partially cooked. Stop calling hiring someone away with a better offer "poaching". The corporations do not own their employees, yet, and I for one would like to not see the idea that they do continually normalized by people who should know better.

Re:

[cayenne8]

I wonder...

Will Apple updates come out that disable these functions in the watches that were sold pre-lawsuit?

Re:

[olddoc]

Yes Masimo is the real deal. I work as an anesthesiologist and monitoring pulse oximetry (blood oxygen saturation) is an important component for the safe conduct of an anesthetic. I've been in the field since the late 1980s and earlier medical pulse oximeters were unreliable with patient movement or poor perfusion, such as in cases of low blood pressure from blood loss. Masimo hospital pulse oximeters were a nice upgrade. They were clearly better at tracking saturation with movement, cold fingers and low BP

Re:

[registrations_suck]

Yeah, except they didn't make a deal and now consumers don't get this health functionality. Consumers lose. Oh well.

Disclaimer: I don't have an Apple Watch and will NEVER have an Apple Watch. I will use my Seiko Big Boss until I'm dead.

Re:

[TwistedGreen]

I know, it's shocking, they're actually a real medical device company with a legitimate patent.

Re:

[Bob_Who]

They're clearly not a patent troll [amazon.com] and they made, what I feel, were several reasonable attempts to come to agreement with Apple.

Hey Apple, How do you like them Apples?

Damn! How will Apple users know they lack oxygen?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Easy: they're Apple users.

Can't they just license it?

[mspohr]

I know Apple is reluctant to admit that anybody else has invented anything but wouldn't it be easier to just pay to license the patent?
They might have to swallow a bit of pride but they wouldn't have a crippled watch.

Re:Can't they just license it?

[Xenx]

The problem is that Apple poached employees from Massimo, and reported used their knowledge to build out their sensor. I'm not making a judgement, but I'm sure that makes it harder for Apple to come to an agreement with Massimo.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

Massimo have said that they would be willing to licence the technology. I don't know if Apple has asked for terms, or if Massimo has offered them, but Apple is probably not keen on paying a per-device royalty.

When damages are decided that should give us some idea of how much the licencing fee would be.

Re:

[Xenx]

My point was that any company would want to minimize the royalties, especially Apple. Masimo isn't likely going to be receptive to that.

Re:

[OrangeTide]

Apple had a big feud with Ericsson about two years ago with Apple trying to renegotiate patents and counter with a massive increase in patents for other mobile manufacturers. Apple filed for 2500 patents last year and at times use their patents in aggressive negotiation tactics bordering on a patent troll.

Re:

[DamnOregonian]

That's not what a patent troll is.
That's just business.

Big fight over poorly functioning feature....

[King_TJ]

The people I've seen (yes, even on Apple-centric forums) who compared the blood oxygen readings from their Apple Watch to readings obtained from certified medical equipment made for the purpose have all said the readings from the watch are FAR from accurate or reliable.

Apple is careful not to market it as a "health device", of course -- so it doesn't run afoul of any legislation there. But it's just not a feature that gives real accurate results -- so Apple removing it isn't that big a deal.

As for the quality of Massimo's case? I wouldn't say they're a typical patent troll. This is obviously a technology they've been working on. But they're also a company who bought out "Sound United" back in 2022; a company who owned Marantz, Polk Audio, Bowers & Wilkins, Boston Acoustics and a couple others. Seems an odd purchase for a company focused on medical devices?

Re:

[Valgrus Thunderaxe]

But they're also a company who bought out "Sound United" back in 2022; a company who owned Marantz, Polk Audio, Bowers & Wilkins, Boston Acoustics and a couple others. Seems an odd purchase for a company focused on medical devices?

Whatever their motivation, these are established companies with real products. Why does Google want a streaming media platform when their core business was search, etc.

Re:Big fight over poorly functioning feature....

[alvinrod]

But they're also a company who bought out "Sound United" back in 2022; a company who owned Marantz, Polk Audio, Bowers & Wilkins, Boston Acoustics and a couple others. Seems an odd purchase for a company focused on medical devices?

I don't know. It seems like a sound business strategy to me.

Re:

[anoncoward69]

Most of these wrist based fitness trackers/watches are going to vary based on how loose/tight you wear the device, amount of body hair, etc Most medical grade devices are clamp or tape on finger based. You're going to have a known amount of pressure based on the clamping mech or a nurse that is trained and has properly applied a tape on device.

Fitbit? O2 sensors?

[mspohr]

I have a cheap FitBit clone ($20) that does a good job of reading blood O2.
I also have several "fingertip" type blood O2 sensors.
What't the problem with Apple?

Re:

[Xenx]

The issue, as I understand it, largely stems from the fact that Apple poached employees from Massimo and reportedly built Apple's O2 sensors using trade secrets. It's harder to come to a license agreement with a company that you're at odds with.

Re:

[Plumpaquatsch]

When you base your patent case around "trade secrets" and "poaching", you admit your patent is not valid.

Re:

[Xenx]

For what it's worth, my understanding is that Masimo lost those claims. However, pending further appeals, they have won the patent dispute. My point, however, was that Masimo is in a position to make licensing more difficult. There hasn't been anything specific about what Apple would have to pay to license, but it has been stated that there would have to be an apology.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

It's the method by which Apple takes the measurement. Other devices use patent free tech that is supposed to be a bit less accurate, although from what I've read Apple's implementation is in fact little better.

The Apple method infringes Massimo's patent, and Massimo produces high end certified gear that takes accurate measurements and can be used in a medical setting.

Apple taketh away?

[Powercntrl]

The article is paywalled, so there's no useful information there. Does this software update mean that existing owners of Series 9 Apple Watches are going to lose the feature?

The funny thing about companies taking away/reducing the functionality of features after-the-fact is that a lot of people seem to be totally okay with this lately. When my partner and I test drove a Tesla model 3 back in September, I looked online to see if there was a regen setting to make the car's accelerator pedal emulate the way a automatic transmission ICE vehicle drives. Turns out at some point Tesla reworked the options [reddit.com] and now there's no setting where the car will coast with your foot removed from the accelerator pedal. Needless to say, the idea of owning a car with magically disappearing features didn't go over well.

That manufacturers can alter the deal after you've paid for a product is a rather disturbing trend, and more disturbing is that people just seem to be rolling over and accepting it.

Re:

[anoncoward69]

My likely guess would be yes. The disabling of the sensor will likely be by a firmware update and when that firmware update is pushed out to all the already sold watches they'll loose the feature too. Apple better come up with a way to compensate existing owners for the removal of a feature they paid for or else they'll probably have another class action lawsuit on their hands.

Re: Apple taketh away?

[ToasterMonkey]

The funny thing about companies taking away/reducing the functionality of features after-the-fact is that a lot of people seem to be totally okay with this lately.

It's part of the price we pay for being totally ok adding functionality after the fact. Change isn't always what we want and people are used to being disappointed I think.

Apple & patents

[Growlley]

Live by the sword die by the sword,

Incoming Lawsuit

[organgtool]

So Apple would rather remove a much-touted feature on their watches, leaving their customers hung out to dry, than pay another company a patent licensing fee. The class-action lawyers can't wait to get their teeth into this one.

Re:

[NoMoreACs]

So Apple would rather remove a much-touted feature on their watches, leaving their customers hung out to dry, than pay another company a patent licensing fee. The class-action lawyers can't wait to get their teeth into this one.

I don't think Massimo is claiming Patent Infringement; rather, Trade Secret Poaching.

What they want is somewhat unclear.

Re:

[Plumpaquatsch]

You misspelled "So Apple would rather disable a feature that hasn't been much-touted in years in watches sold in the US in the future and which the future buyers would be well aware about not being there, but potentially being enabled in the future". Your career in class-action lawsuits is not looking good.

Samsung watch has the blood-oxygen feature too

[drainbramage]

I was wondering why I saw no reports of Massimo going after Samsung.
Then I found out that back in 2020 Samsung decided to add "Massimo SafetyNet" to phones.
Problem averted?

Live by the rounded edge patents, die by them

[Cyberax]

Remember when Apple abused design patents to lock out Samsung? Well, I do.

Re:

[Plumpaquatsch]

Remember when Samsung lawyers couldn't tell apart a Samsung and an iPhone in front of a judge, because Samsung clearly copied the iPhone?

Re:

[Cyberax]

Lawyers with bad vision who probably haven't even seen their products? Yawn.

But I agree, in the pulse-oximeter case the violation was much more severe. Samsung merely made a phone that looked similar (and functioned nothing like an iPhone), Apple just stole the technology wholesale.