1 Like

Very sad that a law firm has found a way to limit innovation of managing and distributing blood sugar data. Implications are are reaching not just for abott but dexcom etc.

Abbot statement?

This is extremely scary stuff. I hope they do not get away with any of it. They might have a right to the tools they have made, but once the data is there you should be able to do whatever you want with it. How can they have a right to the data at that point? It’s your data.

This could be equated to so many things, and so wrong.

1 Like

Hate to take a contrarian view, but there is nothing here stating that Abbott ‘owns’ your data. They are objecting to what they see as an illegal method of extracting it by infringing Abbott’s software copyrights. Like it or not, Abbott has every right to protect their IP. If the court agrees with Abbott’s position - end of story, all the amateur-lawyer interpretation in this article aside. They should try to negotiate access with Abbott or develop a non-infringing method.

I lost three patent infringement cases in my career where I felt our company was unequivocally in the right. The court didn’t agree. That’s life.


Also I find the contention that Abbott effectively claims ownership of part of your body, because insulin pumps and glucose monitors would be ‘parts of your body’ or ‘organs’ rather ridiculous. These devices are very useful, but they’re not part of our body. Such outrageous claims don’t help us as a community and undermine our credibility.

1 Like

I guess it’s how it’s looked at. But I see it as a device is reading the data that is then being used by another device to do what you want.

And I have bought the product and should then be able to use it the way I want? If I turn my VW bug into a dunebuggy, I have that right?