TIVO vs E*

[jacmyoung]

What comes first more HD or the Tivo ruling?

Judging from Judge Folsom's November schedule, unless he had already did most of his reveiw for this motion in October, otherwise he is now so booked the decision may be delayed further.

If Charlie is waiting for the decision before releasing any new HD there could be a long wait

In any event, my guess is the longer the delay, the better chance for E* to get a favorable decision. Because being in contempt means a "flagrant disregard" of the court order. If this is the case, logic tells me the judge would have wanted it to stop sooner rather than later.

As it stands, the 3 to 4 million E* DVRs are still ticking along right under the judge's nose.

[vampz26]

Judging from Judge Folsom's November schedule, unless he had already did most of his reveiw for this motion in October, otherwise he is now so booked the decision may be delayed further.

If Charlie is waiting for the decision before releasing any new HD there could be a long wait

In any event, my guess is the longer the delay, the better chance for E* to get a favorable decision. Because being in contempt means a "flagrant disregard" of the court order. If this is the case, logic tells me the judge would have wanted it to stop sooner rather than later.

As it stands, the 3 to 4 million E* DVRs are still ticking along right under the judge's nose.

Are you still an E* sub?

[CuriousMark]

In any event, my guess is the longer the delay, the better chance for E* to get a favorable decision. Because being in contempt means a "flagrant disregard" of the court order. If this is the case, logic tells me the judge would have wanted it to stop sooner rather than later.

My guess is that the longer the delay the more likely E* will be found in contempt. Because a finding of contempt will require a very detailed analysis and explanation of why KSM doesn't apply or why if it does it has been applied correctly. Such an opinion probably won't stand unless it is very well crafted. Therefore the delay may be an indication that the time and effort is being put in to craft the opinion carefully. A finding of no contempt is simple, can be based on KSM and would be immediately followed by scheduling of discovery for determination of colorability. I think that would have happened very quickly if it were the way the judge were leaning.

Obviously one of us is right and the other wrong. Both arguments for which way the delay leans have some merit. Decide for yourself.

P.S. Not an E* sub, but thinking about getting it for my parents.

[Greg Bimson]

And let's not forget there is another motion on the table which will require quite a bit of analysis: damages. Everything regarding both contempt and damages has been done concurrently. The ruling probably will be, too. So expect delays while both motions are having their decisions crafted.

[SmokeFan14]

What comes first more HD or the Tivo ruling?

The way it's going, the TIVO ruling.

[ArtWIS]

Why not just buy them?

Because their not for sale at this point. If they did go up for sale D* which holds several patents jointly with them would probably out bid E*.

[dgray9]

As a Dish subscriber, I am more interested in the timing of legal processes following the decision than the timing of the decision itself.
Assume for a moment that HHJ Folsom finds E* in contempt and that the injunction is to be carried out immediately (The worst / best of all possible worlds for some.)

Does anyone have a sense on the time frame when infringing dvr's would be disabled (A matter of minutes, hours, days) after the decision had been posted ?
Before the decision had been posted i.e. on Pacer ?

How long might it take for the legal process of a stay to be implemented by an appeals court (again hours or days) assuming Folsom issues an immediate injunction following contempt ?

It would seem to me, that all of this legal activity would occur relatively quickly in the context of the legal system for the hypothetical situation given above.
I know there will be some who believe that Dish will never allow the adjucated dvr's to be disabled.
This is only one scenario among many.

Any information based on experience or speculation about the processes following the court's decision dealing with these questions would be appreciated. Thank you.

[riffjim4069]

I know it has been mentioned in the past, but how do you folks feel about the outcome of this case:

A. E* will be found to be in contempt and forced to shutdown offending DVRs.
B. E* will be found to be in contempt, but DVRs are left on while the merits of the "new software" are argued.
C. E* will not be judged to be in contempt.
D. Doesn't matter...E*/TiVo will reach a licensing agreement before any shutdown occurs.
E. Doesn't matter...E* will buy TiVo for way too much money.
F. "A" or "B" and TiVo goes on the rampage to shutdown the VIP series DVRs.
F. Something else.

[Greg Bimson]

Does anyone have a sense on the time frame when infringing dvr's would be disabled (A matter of minutes, hours, day) after the decision had been posted ?
Before the decision had been posted i.e. on Pacer ?

Judge Folsom would issue his decision and an order would be entered once the decision was public. TiVo is asking for an order to obey the injunction within seven days of the decision.

How long might it take for the legal process of a stay to be implemented by an appeals court (again hours or days) assuming Folsom issues an immediate injunction following contempt ?

DISH/SATS would then apply for an emergency stay of Judge Folsom's order to the Court of Appeals pending review.

If the Court of Appeals believes that DISH/SATS has a chance in overturning the order and decision from Judge Folsom, the Court of Appeals will issue the stay.

That may be one of the big reasons for the delay of the decision now. If Judge Folsom feels that KSM does not apply, then the decision must be rather easy to understand AND bulletproof as to why KSM does not apply. That way, when reading the decision, the Court of Appeals can decide that DISH/SATS has no argument, and therefore will not grant a stay.

It goes the other way. If Judge Folsom feels that KSM does apply, then the decision must be easy to understand AND bulletproof as to why KSM does apply. That way, if TiVo decides to appeal, it will be hard for any litigation on the receivers adjudged as infringements to continue.

[navychop]

Scott has posted repeatedly that those DVRs will not be shut off. Period. TiVO knows this. They don't even want them turned off. They want money out of Dish. Worst case, if it all goes against Dish, is that they will pay a fortune to TiVO or buy them. TiVO is publicly traded, at a bit over $6 per share.

TiVO's whole business plan seems to have become one of making a profit thru legal maneuvers when you can't thru business actions.