77 points•onemoresoop•4 days ago•67 comments•

67 comments

droidjj4 days ago
yftsui4 days ago
Hmm these patents are filed in 2019, but Apple Taptic Engine launched in 2015.
smalltorch4 days ago
Wow, that's a lot of money for a little buzz. I mean what could possibly be such sacred knowledge that a vibration could even be patentable.

You spin a unbalanced thing in a circle and it creates a vibration. Make it less unbalanced and you get a smoother vibration.

pdpi4 days ago
The thing that is patentable isn't "a vibration". It's the exact, specific means through which you produce that vibration.

We've gone from completely dumb eccentric rotating mass vibration to trackpads that you'd swear are actually physically clicking, or the Ice Cubes demo in in Nintendo's 1-2-Switch[0], both of which use linear resonant actuators. Those actuators are themselves a complex enough piece of technology to warrant a patent, and the techniques to simulate the feel or real physical objects using those actuators are pretty damn non-trivial as well.

As a general rule, I find that the patent system is problematic but, within the scope of the system as it exists today, these are perfectly reasonable things to patent.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtlqvVfk1-Q

euroderf4 days ago
> trackpads that you'd swear are actually physically clicking

Like my Mac's trackpad ? Can someone ELI5 how it works ? It's gotta be magic-adjacent cos when the machine locks up, the trackpad is deader than a doornail.

nomel4 days ago
It's literally a voice coil with a mass on it. Literally anyone who has ever played with a solenoid, and hooked it up to a speaker, has made one. I did it when I was a kid, decades ago, and watched it vibrate on the table and in my hand. When I tried the first haptic thing I knew exactly how they did it. It's so incredibly obvious I don't understand how it's even patentable, with all the prior "make thing vibrate with electromagnet" work.

It's not really "high tech", it's just tuned well, with some high power for the size.

gherkinnn4 days ago
That little buzz feels like a click on my Air's trackpad and like a tap on my iPhone's keyboard. Any other vibration thingy I came across feels like a vibration thingy, not like a click, not a tap.

As nobody else seems to care or is able to build the same, maybe it is worth a dollar or two. Though 5.7B is a bit much.

sokoloff4 days ago
A dollar or two? Per device that infringes?

Apple has sold over 3 billion iPhones and 4.5 billion iPhones, iPads, and iPods together.

$5.7B seems low if every one of those devices infringes.

If it’s iPhone 6s and later and all watches (for taptic input), that’s around 2 1/3 billion phones and 1/3 billion watches, so even just $2/device gets you into that range.

bigyabai4 days ago
Why do people cry foul like they've lost a limb when OpenAI steals Apple IP, but then shirk away from condemning Apple stealing Taction or Masimo's IP?

The community has to pick a lane. Either IP theft is good and promotes competition, or IP theft is bad and we have to apply the law equally.

redwall_hp4 days ago
A civil dispute over patent details (which is basically business as usual in technology) is not the same thing as orchestrating a criminal corporate espionage ring to exfiltrate inside information.

One is arguing over the legal application of publicly filed information, the other is literal espionage, which not only impacts non-public trade secrets and insider (i.e. stock implications) information, but also raises questions about external agents secretly making actions that could undermine operations.

Nobody goes to prison for patent infringement, but you absolutely can for the latter.

andsoitis4 days ago
> The community has to pick a lane.

There isn’t one mind. We are unique individuals with different opinions. Opinions of an individual can even be contradictory!

smalltorch4 days ago
I need more details which the article doesn't provide but I'm pretty sure vibration is common knowledge and what could the design possibly done that was so patentable
eecc4 days ago
Like the parent wrote: one “patent” is a miniature vibrator, something like those found in cheap sex toys, the other consists of poaching people working on the frontiers of knowledge, corrupting them to steal such unique ideas for money.

Tell me you’re not so thick

nozzlegear4 days ago
Goomba fallacy, they're not the same people
fennecbutt4 days ago
For the same reason that "rounded corners" was patentable I guess. Now all things being equal of course Apple should pay as Samsung has in the past.
devindotcom4 days ago
i assume this matter was discussed
dmix4 days ago
I remember working at an office building and the company on the floor above us won a big patent suit against Microsoft. We didn't see them at the office after that. I assumed they just stopped working and lived off the money.
MiroslavPokorny4 days ago
What makes you think the parent company actually "shared" the win with the workers ?
hingler364 days ago
I'm interested in reading more information as it comes out, but a lot of the comments claiming it's "just vibrations" are being a bit reductionist. These devices are controlled by complex algorithms, and they take a lot of time and money to create. Why shouldn't this company enjoy the same IP protections that Apple enjoys on their work?
93po4 days ago
My issue with stuff like this is their work is not worth $6 billion dollars. Yes it takes time to develop this stuff but it isn't ground-breaking work and isn't especially novel. A room of experienced engineers, given the same constraints, would likely be able to come to the same design conclusions without much time or expense. Patents in general have this problem. A lot of it is a race to patent as much obvious and fringe-not-immediately-useful-today stuff as possible and it unfortunately works a lot of the time.
fennecbutt4 days ago
So you agree then that Samsung paying Apple $539m for the rounded corners dispute was wrong? And that rounded corners "aren't worth that much money".
double0jimb04 days ago
Such a ridiculous take. Of course a room full of engineers can probably come up with a solution.

But what got those engineers in the same room in the first place?

What got them in the same room in the first place was them being the only group of people (most likely) working on a specific piece of enabling technology that they believed would be rewarded by the market and adoption AND they needed to make a living in the mean time (getting paid to do that work.)

A patent is the best thing we’ve collectively come up with to allow said group / company to invest the time and money in advance to making that technology and wants to risk/trade 20 future years to collect profit on the work they do now.

If you don’t like the game, get better at it.

jjtheblunt4 days ago
> Why shouldn't this company enjoy the same IP protections that Apple enjoys on their work?

I think they do, but the company themselves found Apple didn't infringe, and then the court agreed. somehow it got appealed and then the appeals jury said they did not willfully infringe, so ... $5.7 billion?

Something is way weirder than usual in this case

jjtheblunt4 days ago
from the article, Taction themselves agreed Apple's tech was different :

"Apple's Taptic Engine is fundamentally different from Taction's technology, which Taction's own testing of Apple's products confirmed during trial," Apple said in response

onemoresoop4 days ago
Yeah but they claim it still infringes on the patent and the jury accepted Taction’s infringement case. Im curious of the outcome in the end.
jjtheblunt4 days ago
Yeah it's a weird case. First time, Taction agrees Apple didn't infringe. Apple found not infringing. Then why appeal? Taction's lawyer not happy? Hard to tell from teh article.
nchmy4 days ago
Just because apple provides a (likely) self-serving statement, doesn't mean it is accurate. Evidently the jury found it to not be convincing
jjtheblunt4 days ago
The jury found Apple innocent the first time, when Taction agreed not the same technology.

So the article doesn't explain why it was appealed, then found shady on appeal.

it's a weird article, worth reading.

Read the full thread on Hacker News →

Related stories