Thread: Notice of Tivo Injunction

Originally Posted by Thomas22

Remember, it was Dish that said they didn't infringe and would win the jury trial.
It was Dish that said they would win the appeal.
It was Dish that said the patent office would rule TiVo's patents invalid.

None of that happened and you want to believe them now when they say they don't have to comply with the injunction?

How many times do we have to tell you this? Dish IS in compliance. They changed the damn software! And the hardware patents were invalidated.

Originally Posted by Scooters

I have an old 501 in the closet. I wonder what happens if I try to reactivate it.

If it "breaks" later, will I get an upgrade???

501s have the new software. You can activate those for the forseeable future.

Originally Posted by Thomas22

TiVo has a poison pill. A hostile takeover is impossible. However, if they offer enough money I suppose a buyout is possible.

It isn't impossible. This has been discussed to death. The so-called "poison pill" doesn't amount to that much in the whole scheme of things. Dish absolutely has the money to buy and shut down your precious Tivo.

Hi there!

Originally Posted by NpaulTodd

you don't have to PVR is free for the 7100/7200 ( a few years ago they did try to charge but that was long time ago , call them up and tell the to turn DVR on its FREE ( by the way you can put 120 gb hd in there )

That sounds good, but my DP7100 is not healthy. It's working as I type this, but it is showing early signs of a hardware failure and I've never been a huge fan of this receiver anyway. I'm tired of fighting with it.

Since the 921 I have coming to me is used (i.e. was in service when the injunction was issued), maybe there's a chance that Dish will let me add it to my account. Something tells me that Dish will say no, though. I'm not sure what I'll do at that point since I didn't want to lease a receiver. If they say no, I'll either have to try to find one of the "non-infringing" receivers for sale for a good price, or it's lease time...

Why doesn't the Ampex HS-100 constitute "prior art"? Just because Tivo did it digitally, decades later? IMHO the PTO is completely out to lunch wrt Tivo's patent.

Originally Posted by TheKrell

Why doesn't the Ampex HS-100 constitute "prior art"? Just because Tivo did it digitally, decades later? IMHO the PTO is completely out to lunch wrt Tivo's patent.

Tivo wasn't even the first to do it digitally. Replay actually invented the DVR, their patents are earlier than the immitator, Tivo. D* though, had the good sense to buy Replay, now they can build DVRs using Replay technology and patents and tell Tivo to take a flying leap.

Regardless of what Dish hopes, plans, dreams, or believes it's up to the judge at the end of the day. If the judge says turn it off the disc will go silent.

Originally Posted by Sileny Jizda

Regardless of what Dish hopes, plans, dreams, or believes it's up to the judge at the end of the day. If the judge says turn it off the disc will go silent.

Dish will not go silent. They will end up paying TiVo. Just like the Blackberry situation, when it comes down to no other options, Dish will pay whatever is needed to keep the DVRs working. Even if it means like DIRECTV paying $1/month/tivo dvr. Dish is charging $5/month pure profit fee anyways on the DVRs, it is not like they do not have a DVR fee now, they might suffer some damage with the 501/508s, they will have to count them as the ones that got the license in the original judgement.

Originally Posted by Thomas22

The hardware claims were remanded back to the district court.

Apparently Charlie thinks he's a federal judge and can reword an injunction unilaterally.

The USPO subsequently reviewed and invalidated the hardware patents, but affirmed some of the key software patents