I think Charlie Ergen is an outstanding businessman...however, I don't think EchoStar shareholders are very happy about his blowing hundreds of millions in shareholder funds because he is "stubborn" in the Tivo case. While most people have been focused on the consumer aspect of losing DVR functionality, investors will focus on how their funds are being used used or, in this case, misused. The reason I am reposting the 2-year old article is to show what many of us predicted would happen...Mr. Ergen's actions to avoid a licensing agreement and violating a court order would potentially cost the company $$$,$$$,$$$. The CEO and BOD have some explaining to do...
I love the "when Fios gets to me, I'm gone!" You'll be here a LONG time since they are slowing down expansion...it not stopping altogether, according to WSJ. Losing $800.00 per new customer.
They need Charlie.
Not a lot...certainly not more than 2K. In my opinion, Charlie is a visionary and astute businessman with a unique ability to produce bottom-line financial success. That's why his actions in this case are so puzzling. While I have applauded Mr. Ergen for initially challenging the Tivo patents, his personal vendetta in this matter is costing the company hundreds of millions. Certainly, these funds can be put to better use than filling Tivo's coffers and paying legal expenses. As far as Tivo is concerned I have no desire to purchase their stock since they are now a company focused on litigation instead of innovation. Moreover, I believe it is only a matter of time before some of their patents are overturned. What a horrible business model.
The biggest difference is Verizon and AT&T have obtained "video processing" patents and are being helped by Microsoft and others. The Telcos counterclaim that Tivo is infringing several of their patents.
I won't disagree. While it is certainly their right to protect their intellectual property, they certainly don't innovate much of anything these days.
Excellent point. For example, do we know what Tivo was demanding for licensing fees? I can imagine it was even more eye-popping per year than the penalties paid thus far by Dish.
Emotional? Come on Don...I'm a man and retired Marine...nothing emotional, sensitive or empathetic about me.
Emotional? Come on Don...I'm a man and retired Marine...nothing emotional, sensitive or empathetic about me.
My position on this case has remained unchanged over-the-years. While I do not believe the Tivo patents are unenforceable (my opinion), the courts ruled otherwise and they issued a lawful order for Dish Network to disable the infringing DVRs. Dish Network, under the stewardship of its CEO, decided to willfully violate the court order and were subsequently judged to be in contempt. After all, the definition of contempt is willful disobedience of a lawful order.
My only complaint is that Charlie's stubbornness (self admitted in this case) is causing the shareholders to lose money. If this were Mr. Ergen's personal funds then so be it. However, the CEO has a fiduciary duty to run the company for the benefit of shareholders. Moreover, he must exercise common law duties of care, skill and diligence. In other words, he is expected to demonstrate "such care as an ordinary man might be expected to take on his own behalf." It is my opinion that violating a court order is not something a diligent man would do - it is negligent behavior.
The bottom line is the infringement coupled with violating the court order, being found in contempt of court, and not seeking to minimize the company's losses through a number of possible options (not paying penalties and obtaining favorable licensing fees are just two of them) is, in fact, already affecting Dish Network's bottom-line. It's costing them tens if not hundreds of millions. A very small portion of that money is ours.
In my defense, I gotta stop posting with my mobile phone (pain in the arse to address complex issues)...and I have to stop posting issues involve substance and thought since, unfortunately, a growing percentage of folks cannot see beyond their needs and how these issues affect others. For example, when E* lights-up a new HD channels the huddled masses to wild with, "We love you Charlie." However, when you point-out that HD quality if inferior to what it was a few years ago and that Dish Network should perhaps address their quality issues...well, you get quite another reply. In this case, if Dish Network were to disable the infringing DVRs then the nasty and snide comments would run rampant. However, if you point-out the CEO's actions in the Tivo case are costing shareholders $$$,$$$,$$$, well, you get attacked because Joe Schmoe isn't a shareholder and simply blames Tivo.
Riff
Stop spreading lies to fit your agenda -- you're just making yourself look like a fool. Your statement above has ZERO basis in fact. Just because ReplyTV DVRs made it to market a little before TiVo does NOT mean TiVo stole anything from them. Both peices of hardware were in development at the same time. Furthermore, TiVo has DVR patents that predate any of ReplyTV patents.
"enforceable" (should read my own writing)
