According to multiple media reports, it has been reported that Apple will stop selling the Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 in the United States this week. Apple and medical technology company Masimo have long had a patent dispute over Apple Watch's blood oxygen sensor technology. The US International Trade Commission (ITC) has ruled that two Apple Watch watches have infringed on Masimo's partial blood oxygen sensor patents, and therefore demanded that Apple "stop and terminate" the import and sale of Apple watches with blood oxygen detection capabilities.
Regarding this, a reporter from the Daily Economic News contacted Apple to inquire about the situation, but as of the time of publication, no response has been received.
According to a statement released by Apple, the upcoming suspension of Apple Watch sales is a precautionary measure taken by the company to comply with the ruling if it takes effect. Apple will appeal the ruling of the US ITC regarding the patent technology for Apple Watch's blood oxygen sensor.
Currently, product bans caused by patent disputes are not uncommon worldwide. An industry insider told reporters on WeChat that once a ban is imposed, for the implementer (Apple), the loss is the market, and for patent holders, it is a powerful weapon.
Apple will discontinue two smartwatches in the United States
On October 26th this year, the International Trade Commission (ITC) ruled on a patent dispute over blood oxygen sensor technology between Apple and Masimo, stating that Apple's Apple Watch, which includes blood oxygen measurement functions, infringed on Masimo's pulse oximeter patent. However, before the import ban takes effect, the Biden administration will have 60 days to decide whether to veto the ban based on policy considerations.
Apple believes in the above statement that ITC's decision will cause harm to Apple's suppliers and consumers, and may have a greater impact on the overall economy.
According to data provided to reporters by the patent data service platform Wisdom Sprout on December 19th, as of the latest, Apple and its affiliated companies currently have more than 90 patent applications related to "blood oxygen" worldwide, including more than 50 authorized invention patents. From a technical perspective, Apple's patent layout in this field mainly focuses on related sub sectors such as electronic devices, light emitters, portability, physiological signals, and optical sensing.
Public information shows that the Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2 were launched by Apple in September this year. The former is equipped with a brand new S9 SiP chip, second-generation ultra wideband chip (UWB), and supports sports and health monitoring functions, including heart rate monitoring, blood oxygen measurement, sleep monitoring, as well as car accident detection and fall detection, with a starting price of 2999 yuan; The latter has the largest display screen on the Apple Watch, which not only supports the functions of the Apple Watch Series 9, but also provides safety protection for professional sports such as outdoor sports, outdoor exploration, and diving, starting at 6499 yuan.
In early November, Apple released its fourth quarter financial performance report for the 2023 fiscal year ending on September 30, showing a net sales revenue of $9.322 billion for wearable, home, and accessory businesses, including Apple Watch, compared to $9.65 billion in the same period last year, a 3% decrease.
The above-mentioned industry insiders told reporters that the statutory remedies for patent litigation have the option of prohibition under the intellectual property systems of most countries. But whether the final court will consider a ban on sales is closely related to the judicial practice and patent nature of each country.
She specifically analyzed that: In terms of the nature of patents, most countries are cautious about whether to grant injunctions for infringement of standard patents. Standard patents have a natural monopoly and are bound by the 'FRAND' principle, so the threshold for most countries is relatively high. There are more injunctions for infringement of non-standard patents than for infringement of standard patents, but some countries believe that injunctions are only granted when money cannot compensate for the losses of the patentee For patent holders, receiving money is only a matter of time, but once an injunction is issued, it will cause greater harm to the implementer; The implementer's income from the market decreases, and the payment ability to the rights holder also decreases
It is reported that the "FRAND" principle refers to the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and non discrimination. How to define the "FRAND" principle? Shen Hongfei, Vice President of Huawei's Legal Department and Minister of Major Projects, previously explained in an interview with reporters, "On the one hand, we need to refer to industry licensing practices to compare agreements; on the other hand, in the past decade, major countries and regions have been practicing and elaborating on the fair, reasonable, and non discriminatory application."
Frequent product bans caused by patent disputes
Currently, product bans caused by patent disputes are not uncommon worldwide.
On December 10, 2018, Qualcomm announced that the Fuzhou Intermediate People's Court had granted two interim injunctions to Qualcomm against four Chinese subsidiaries of Apple, demanding that they immediately cease infringing on Qualcomm's two patents, including importing, selling, and promising to sell unauthorized products in China. The related products involve seven major iPhone models, including the iPhone X.
In early 2017, Apple refused to pay Qualcomm chip licensing fees, and the cooperation between the two sides broke down. The two companies have filed lawsuits in multiple countries around the world, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, and the battle was once difficult to distinguish. After more than two years of litigation, it ultimately ended with Apple paying high patent fees to Qualcomm, allowing Qualcomm to continue its original business model. To some extent, this also means that Apple's challenge to Qualcomm's licensing methods ended in failure.
In addition to the patent war between Apple and Qualcomm, in recent years, OPPO and Nokia have filed related lawsuits in Germany, the United Kingdom, France, India, Indonesia and other places, with each party having its own winner. Affected by the lawsuit, there were previously rumors of OPPO withdrawing from Germany.
Meanwhile, vivo is also embroiled in a patent dispute with Nokia. On May 30th this year, according to the official website of vivo Germany, vivo has decided to temporarily stop selling products in the German market. The reason why vivo products cannot be sold in Germany originated in April this year when the Mannheim District Court in Germany ruled in favor of Nokia in a patent case against vivo, which involved Nokia's 4G Standard Essential Patent (SEP).
However, in the view of the industry insiders mentioned above, once a ban is imposed, it will cause market losses for implementers and be a powerful weapon for patent holders. But if the patentee ultimately only wants to collect money, the ban will exclude the implementer from the market and harm both parties.