this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
51 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37717 readers
459 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The saga continues...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 8 points 10 months ago

🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:

Click here to see the summaryApple filed an emergency motion seeking court permission to begin selling two of its most popular watches again until a final decision on its broader appeal in a bitter patent dispute is decided.

The company cut off sales right before the Christmas holiday and in a motion filed Tuesday, Apple said it would suffer “irreparable harm” if previous court orders remain for the two weeks that it said the U.S. International Trade Commission will take to respond to its appeal.

The disruption will likely cost Apple about $300-400 million in holiday-season sales, estimated Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives.

That’s a relative drop in the bucket for Apple, given that industry analysts are expecting the company to generate nearly $120 billion in sales this quarter, which includes the holiday shopping season.

After a 60-day review, the ITC’s decision became final Tuesday, but the company had already pulled the watches from store shelves and removed them from its online sales lineup.

Apple contends that the ITC’s decision is based on multiple factual errors and that Masimo does not sell a competing product in the U.S. in “meaningful quantities” and would not suffer harm if the order is stayed.


Saved 44% of original text.