Apple's alleged monopolistic practices called "rotten to the core" in Apple Watch ECG...

[midian182]

In brief: Apple, a company that is no stranger to accusations of monopolistic practices, has had an antitrust lawsuit filed against it by medical device maker AliveCor. The suit claims that Cupertino stole its heart-rate monitoring technology and cornered the market in a "predatory" manner.

AliveCor says Apple stole its "cardiological detection and analysis technology" when it added an electrocardiogram (ECG) monitor to the 2018 Apple Watch. The company made the KardiaBand, an Apple Watch wristband with an ECG feature, and the SmartRhythm companion app that would alert wearers to any unusual heartbeat patterns.

According to the filing, Apple initially accepted the SmartRhythm app onto its store but later claimed it "violated" unwritten App Store guidelines. AliveCor adapted SmartRhythm multiple times so that it met Apple's ever-changing policies, but Cupertino eventually made changes to the watchOS's heart-rate algorithm so SmartRhythm and other competing apps would no longer work. An action that the suit says "put countless AliveCor users' lives in danger."

"As it has done multiple times over the years in other markets, Apple decided that it would not accept competition on the merits. Almost immediately after AliveCor started selling KardiaBand and its apps, Apple began a concentrated campaign to corner the market for heart rate analysis on the Apple Watch, because the value of controlling such critical health data (with the accompanying ability to exploit it) was apparently too much of a temptation for Apple," states the suit.

"With a single update, Apple thus eliminated competition that consumers clearly wanted and needed, depriving them of choice for heart rate analysis that is better than what Apple can provide. And all for an incremental value gain for an already-two-trillion-dollar company."

AliveCor says that "Apple's anticompetitive conduct was and remains rotten to the core."

AliveCor is seeking damages for the loss of business, business relationships, client goodwill, and more. In December, it sued Apple for patent infringement in Texas, and last month requested the US International Trade Commission ban imports of Apple Watches.

Image credit: DenPhotos

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/89843-apple-alleged-monopolistic-practices-called-rotten-core-apple.html

 

[Dimitriid]

Not the least bit surprised: Apple has stated, point blank, that they won't create apps or integrate software features until they're sure their version is just basically perfect, orders of magnitude above the competition.

Of course if you directly control the competition through your App store well, that's just a happy coincidence for them now is it?

 

[wiyosaya]

It would not surprise me if crApple did steal this from the company. It has been SOP for crApple for a long, long, long time. Steve Jobs, himself, admitted as much in this movie - which was a interview with him. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2104994/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_8

 

[CommonSenseTech]

Heart rate monitoring is a feature that would make perfect sense to integrate into a smart watch. Every smart watch maker now has it, and yeah, the algos change over time as the hardware does.

This reminds me of all the software companies who made file browsing software complaining about Windows incorporating file browsing into the OS. Continuous improvement and iteration is the only constant in tech and that a separate EKG function would be obsoleted by innovation in the smart watch category was assured.

Too many in tech want to sit around and monetize one invention for years; then they complain when they get disrupted.

 

[Chemicalfaerie]

It would not surprise me if crApple did steal this from the company. It has been SOP for crApple for a long, long, long time. Steve Jobs, himself, admitted as much in this movie - which was a interview with him. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2104994/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_8

Is this the same one where in 30 minutes' time he also accuses MS of stealing the same tech he stole?

 

[yukka]

Heart rate monitoring is a feature that would make perfect sense to integrate into a smart watch. Every smart watch maker now has it, and yeah, the algos change over time as the hardware does.

This reminds me of all the software companies who made file browsing software complaining about Windows incorporating file browsing into the OS. Continuous improvement and iteration is the only constant in tech and that a separate EKG function would be obsoleted by innovation in the smart watch category was assured.

Too many in tech want to sit around and monetize one invention for years; then they complain when they get disrupted.

The issue I see here isn’t that Apple wanted to integrate the functionality into the watch but they have actively stopped other developers from putting their own software on the watches. The only choice is the Apple software. There is no market for an alternative because Apple have made sure that doesn’t happen.

Microsoft didn’t stop alternate browsers being installed on Windows or remove functionality from them so they couldn’t serve their purpose.

 

[punctualturn]

It would not surprise me if crApple did steal this from the company. It has been SOP for crApple for a long, long, long time. Steve Jobs, himself, admitted as much in this movie - which was a interview with him. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2104994/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_8

What is worse, given that we are living on some strange times of empty human beings that needs to worship corporations and celebrities to have some sense of personal worth, they will blindly and rabidly defend apple, nvidia, intel, the kartrashians, etc, regardless of their practices and actions.

 

[Cubi Dorf]

This is what is happen when company get to make the rules.

 

[GregonMaui]

It would not surprise me if crApple did steal this from the company. It has been SOP for crApple for a long, long, long time. Steve Jobs, himself, admitted as much in this movie - which was a interview with him. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2104994/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_8

yah, nobody ever had ECGs before, totally invented by AliveCor. Are you kidding me?

 

[CommonSenseTech]

The issue I see here isn’t that Apple wanted to integrate the functionality into the watch but they have actively stopped other developers from putting their own software on the watches. The only choice is the Apple software. There is no market for an alternative because Apple have made sure that doesn’t happen.

That’s how Apple does business and it is how Apple has always done business. It’s not new nor surprising.

Those who don’t like it can purchase any number of other devices, but it would appear that the demand for people who want easily hacked smart watches is quite low compared to demand for Apple watches.

Microsoft didn’t stop alternate browsers being installed on Windows

Gosh, you’re taking me back to the 1990s when I was a teen and RealPlayer was ranting about how API changes to Windows made people want to use WMP instead of RealPlayer.

Sometimes, a sucky product is just a sucky product.

 

[GregonMaui]

Not the least bit surprised: Apple has stated, point blank, that they won't create apps or integrate software features until they're sure their version is just basically perfect, orders of magnitude above the competition.

Of course if you directly control the competition through your App store well, that's just a happy coincidence for them now is it?

that's a weird one mate. AliveCor has its own separate product, all fine and good based on decades old technology called ECG. They, like almost any professional looks at the ECG data to determine beat misfunctions, decades old. Claiming they invented it, huh? they weren't even around when ECGs were invented. The App Store rules specifically state that an app cannot simply duplicate a core functionality - perfectly legitimate rule. So all AliveCor had to do is create additional features in their app that distinguished it from the essentially open-source functionality of detecting arythmias (decades old). Of course, it didn't help their case any when they stopped working with Apple and decided to sue them for using decades old technology to monitor arythmias. so Bogus!

 

[GregonMaui]

The issue I see here isn’t that Apple wanted to integrate the functionality into the watch but they have actively stopped other developers from putting their own software on the watches. The only choice is the Apple software. There is no market for an alternative because Apple have made sure that doesn’t happen.

Microsoft didn’t stop alternate browsers being installed on Windows or remove functionality from them so they couldn’t serve their purpose.

nah, that's garbage. AliveCor can still have an app on the watch, it just has to do more than duplicate base functionality. Read your contract boys!

also, since when do you want to do business with a company and start by suing said company over the use of decades old technology instead of working with said company? Not a sustainable business practice. with all the health commitments made by Apple, they easily could have found a way to work together instead of pissing in the apple juice (movie reference, anyone get it?)

 

[GregonMaui]

This is what is happen when company get to make the rules.

This is what is happen when company get to make the rules.

That is what happens when a company makes the product, they do get to make the rules. there is no law anywhere that says you have to open your products to outsiders, unless you are a monopoly, which Apple having about 33% of market, is by definition, not one.

Also, Did Alivecor open up its products? And why if they wanted to work with Apple, did they sue Apple over usage of decades old technology, that they did not invent?

 

[GregonMaui]

Is this the same one where in 30 minutes' time he also accuses MS of stealing the same tech he stole?

You might want to re-watch that. Apple did not steal the GUI tech, it purchased rights to the GUI tech from Xerox Parc. MS stole it - end of story

 

[GregonMaui]

What is worse, given that we are living on some strange times of empty human beings that needs to worship corporations and celebrities to have some sense of personal worth, they will blindly and rabidly defend apple, nvidia, intel, the kartrashians, etc, regardless of their practices and actions.

No - thanks for the derision though, but no thanks, don't want any. and no one really worships corporations, that is in your mind. this is a technical issue worthy of debate. If you keep emotions out of it, there is more room for facts.

 

[Dimitriid]

that's a weird one mate. AliveCor has its own separate product, all fine and good based on decades old technology called ECG. They, like almost any professional looks at the ECG data to determine beat misfunctions, decades old. Claiming they invented it, huh? they weren't even around when ECGs were invented. The App Store rules specifically state that an app cannot simply duplicate a core functionality - perfectly legitimate rule. So all AliveCor had to do is create additional features in their app that distinguished it from the essentially open-source functionality of detecting arythmias (decades old). Of course, it didn't help their case any when they stopped working with Apple and decided to sue them for using decades old technology to monitor arythmias. so Bogus!

It really isn't a matter of who "owns" the rights to anything at all because like you mention Electrocardiograms predate both, just a matter of who gets to use commonplace technology for an app.

It seems to me that Apple should not get to decide who can and cannot use electrocardiogram data on an app just because the app happens to be on their store.

So AliveCor here doesn't really needs to prove they own any kind of patent over ECGs at all, they just need to prove that Apple decided to arbitrarily dismiss their app to boost their own new functionality. Whenever or not there's malice to it is probably for a court to decide and would come into play when deciding damages but patents are probably not involved at all here and it's just about Apple acting as if they could patent something they have no right to patent to and doing so by conveniently applying arbitrary and probably unrelated "rules" for their store to get competitors out of the picture.

Case might be dismissed but whenever or not we explore the inherent problem of patent law which should never grant "My intenvion is to use this commonplace technology only on a vaguely defined new method called "App"" to begin with.

 

[m4a4]

That’s how Apple does business and it is how Apple has always done business. It’s not new nor surprising.

...So it's ok for Apple to screw over their competition because that's how they've always done it? Do you hear yourself right now?

 

[GregonMaui]

That’s how Apple does business and it is how Apple has always done business. It’s not new nor surprising.

Those who don’t like it can purchase any number of other devices, but it would appear that the demand for people who want easily hacked smart watches is quite low compared to demand for Apple watches.


Gosh, you’re taking me back to the 1990s when I was a teen and RealPlayer was ranting about how API changes to Windows made people want to use WMP instead of RealPlayer.

Sometimes, a sucky product is just a sucky product.

Actually, if you read the Developers agreement, you cannot have an app that simply duplicates the core functionality of a device. AliveCor used decades old technology to come up with an app that did one thing - duplicated core functionality. Now they had multiple opportunities here to get it right. 1) Expand greatly on the functionality they provided, 2) Work with Apple to make a better health monitoring product, 3) not sue Apple over a BS claim that they invented ECGs. so1) if you have a product on someone else's hardware, expert the market to move on and render you obsolete if you don't keep offering better and better stuff - there is no requirment that the other company continues producing the product you rely on, unless you establish that requirement contractually, 2) don't sue the hand that feeds you, who is going to keep supporting you then, eh?

Finally alivecor is so full of crap. I use a Pacemaker, I use ECG data, and wow, I have other non-Apple apps that store and process the data. who knew?

 

[GregonMaui]

...So it's ok for Apple to screw over their competition because that's how they've always done it? Do you hear yourself right now?

Do you hear yourself? You are concerned that apple is screwing competition on its own device. An app that is free BTW. AliveCor screwed up and is trying to sue its way out of this mess. It offered a product on Applewatch that did nothing but duplicate core functionality - a use that is not allowed. so they could have added functionality and still been in Apple store. If there was data that was being deprecated in the API (happens all the time), well so be it. If Alivecor wanted to, it could have worked with Apple, there are always contractual terms to work out.

 

[GregonMaui]

It really isn't a matter of who "owns" the rights to anything at all because like you mention Electrocardiograms predate both, just a matter of who gets to use commonplace technology for an app.

It seems to me that Apple should not get to decide who can and cannot use electrocardiogram data on an app just because the app happens to be on their store.

So AliveCor here doesn't really needs to prove they own any kind of patent over ECGs at all, they just need to prove that Apple decided to arbitrarily dismiss their app to boost their own new functionality. Whenever or not there's malice to it is probably for a court to decide and would come into play when deciding damages but patents are probably not involved at all here and it's just about Apple acting as if they could patent something they have no right to patent to and doing so by conveniently applying arbitrary and probably unrelated "rules" for their store to get competitors out of the picture.

Case might be dismissed but whenever or not we explore the inherent problem of patent law which should never grant "My intenvion is to use this commonplace technology only on a vaguely defined new method called "App"" to begin with.

LOL, thast funny. Apple is in no way obligated to keep providing data in an API where that Data was deprecated. Alivecor could have contractually worked it out, instead of suing over a BS claim to common knowledge, the also could have provided additional functionality, what vendor would not want to increase sales by having a super-duper version of something that worked on their hardware, particularly if it was exclusive.

There is no malice whatsoever. If Apple discontinued an API, so, happens all the time. More likely, AliveCor had to change software when he API changed and to add more functionality to its app - simply elected not to - lazy

And for the record. I have apps that use pacemaker data, ECG data, and lots of health data that coexist with the Apple apps, so how is that that other vendors could do this and not AliveCor?

 

[punctualturn]

and no one really worships corporations, that is in your mind.

Yet is funny how you came out swinging at everyone that dared saying anything negative about Apple.

 

[GregonMaui]

Yet is funny how to came out swinging at everyone that dared saying anything negative about Apple.

What you call swinging, most call correcting the record. If you keep it honest and non-emotional, that is how progress is made - Cheers

 

[m4a4]

Do you hear yourself? You are concerned that apple is screwing competition on its own device.

Yes, that is called being anti-competitive. Do you know what that means and how it's illegal? It doesn't sound like it.

I don't care how much you like the company, or how loyal you feel towards them, it doesn't make them above everyone else (which is why they have plenty of antittrust cases against them), including this one.

 

[GregonMaui]

Yes, that is called being anti-competitive. Do you know what that means and how it's illegal? It doesn't sound like it.

I don't care how much you like the company, or how loyal you feel towards them, it doesn't make them above everyone else (which is why they have plenty of antittrust cases against them), including this one.

I’m calling BS. You cannot be anti-competitive on your own device, you are not even required to open your devices up to outside entities. As I’ve said before, alivecor tried to restrict competition by suing on what is essentially standard use of existing technology (ECG), then they offered no distinct function for their product other than the base product (a violation of the contract with Apple to allow use). They could have negated the whole thing by not suing, providing additional functionality, and contracting with Apple to “git er done”

the distinction here is that you appear to allege that there is an obligation to provide access on a non- unique device that only has about 35% market share , so clearly not a monopoly. And provide access in perpetuity, absent a contract to do so, so when an API changed there was a breach (but a breach of nothing as it turns out). Right?

me: no obligation to deliver, developers agreement specifies term of app inclusion

you: A company creating a product must allow third parties access and in perpetuity

 

[Dimitriid]

LOL, thast funny. Apple is in no way obligated to keep providing data in an API where that Data was deprecated. Alivecor could have contractually worked it out, instead of suing over a BS claim to common knowledge, the also could have provided additional functionality, what vendor would not want to increase sales by having a super-duper version of something that worked on their hardware, particularly if it was exclusive.

There is no malice whatsoever. If Apple discontinued an API, so, happens all the time. More likely, AliveCor had to change software when he API changed and to add more functionality to its app - simply elected not to - lazy

And for the record. I have apps that use pacemaker data, ECG data, and lots of health data that coexist with the Apple apps, so how is that that other vendors could do this and not AliveCor?

What do those other apps use for data? Is it that Apple discontinued the API or it was just switched to obtain the sensor data elsewhere? I think I'm a bit lost on the technical side of this at this point by the way (So this is a legit question and not Socratic or rhetorical in nature)