TiVo files patent infringement lawsuits against AT&T and Verizon

[riffjim4069]

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (I probably didn't spell it correctly) has said publicly that it is a "rouge court."

Did Antonin Scalia really accuse Court members of applying various red cosmetics used for coloring their cheeks and lips? If so, this Court is truly being run by a bunch of clowns and/or jesters.

Sorry, I couldn't resist since I am, afterall, a rogue comedian.

 

[Stargazer]

So if what Thomas22 is saying is true, then Tivo waited until after they won a lawsuit against Dish before going after other companies. Now that they won against Dish, they feel that they need to collect against all others infringing the patent that are not paying. They hope this will help them with getting a deal with other companies. If the other companies are smart then they will do the same thing.

 

[riffjim4069]

Lot's of great points being mentioned. The way I see it...based on Tivo's actions they are asserting that just about every multi-tuner DVR on the market is violating their Intellectual Property rights and is costing them hundreds of millions in lost customers (e.g., potential hardware and Tivo service sales). Personally, I think Tivo will file additional lawsuits in the coming months. I also agree with DishSubLA...Verizon and AT&T are well-connected and have some very powerful allies. We shall see what happens.

 

[Thomas22]

Lot's of great points being mentioned. The way I see it...based on Tivo's actions they are asserting that just about every multi-tuner DVR on the market is violating their Intellectual Property rights

Not that it makes much difference since all the DVRs these days are multi-tuner, but TiVo's patents apply equally to both single and multi-tuner DVRs. Their patents are tuner quantity neutral.

 

[navychop]

They have NOT won against Dish/Echostar. The ball is still in play.

Sorry, I believe it will generally be viewed that Tivo is desperate to file such suits, especially since the Dish/Echostar suit is still in progress. A loss there pretty much destroys them, and their failed business plan.

Yep, they are SCREAMING to be bought out. And I suspect the longer it drags out, the lower the price.

Don't try to cheat Charlie.

 

[daverp]

This could be interesting. AT&T Uverse is not their own product. Uverse is Microsoft MediaRoom platform. Sue AT&T over the Uverse DVR and you're directly bringing Microsoft into the battle.

 

[Thomas22]

They have NOT won against Dish/Echostar. The ball is still in play.

I guess Dish paid TiVo $105 million in 2008 for no reason then.

 

[dishcomm]

Huh?

TiVo won the trial. There was an injunction placed against Dish. Dish appealed and lost. The routine injunction stay that was in effect for the duration of the appeal was vacated after the appeals court upheld and reinstated the injunction after Dish lost the appeal.

Dish ignored the injunction and for that reason was recently found in contempt. Once again, Dish has appealed and there is a routine stay in effect for the duration of the appeal.

No injunctions have ever been overturned.

Stay, overturn..Legal terms. The bottom ine is Dish continues to win court battles afer losing previous ones.
The Tivo move from yesterday indicates they are desperate.
Tivo is a flyspeck compared to AT&T and Verizon. Thye won't win a thing. Dihs will continue to beat them back.
Dish will end up paying off Tivo and all will be right with the world.
BTW, where's your dog in this fight?

 

[JPL]

Most of what TiVo is filing suit for has to do with the internal low level workings of DVRs as opposed to the interface. TiVos have a great interface but the only part of the interface involved in the lawsuit is patent number 7,493,015 which has to do with rewind and FF overshoot. The other two patents are about very basic internal processes.

I don't know anything about the other two patents, but with the one you reference here, there is no way TiVo wins this. The patent isn't on over-shoot per se. Meaning that Verizon just having over-shoot compensation doesn't violate the patent. From what I understand the patent is on the algorithm that TiVo uses in their over-shoot functionality. They (TiVo) don't correct for over-shoot by some fixed amount. Their algorithm (which is pretty slick) compensates based off the user's reaction time. It 'learns' how the person with the remote responds (how quickly you hit the play button coming out of ffwd, relative to where the commercial is), and compensates based on the current user. So it better manages where you are when you hit 'play'.

The Verizon s/w doesn't do that. It does over-shoot compensation based on some fixed amount - no matter who's using it. I always wondered why my old TiVo did a much better job coming out commercials than this DVR does. That's why.

This sounds like a company looking to stay afloat by going after every cable operator that they can.

 

[harshness]

At some point you have to show that you're defending your patents on all fronts or you seem to be picking on someone. It is in TiVo's best interest to file where they think they have a violation or they may have the rights vacated because they're not fully protecting them.

 

[Thomas22]

This sounds like a company looking to stay afloat by going after every cable operator that they can.

TiVo has $250 million in cash, no debt, and a very low cash burn rate.

Microsoft recently filed a patent infringement suit against Tom Tom. Were they just trying to stay afloat or were they making a smart business move? Is filing a lawsuit to protect intellectual property an act of desperation? Is obtaining a patent an act of desperation? I mean, if a company isn't going to protect a patent then why bother to get one?

 

[Voyager6]

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (I probably didn't spell it correctly) has said publicly that it is a "rouge court."

I don't think so. Do you have a quote?

I found this about Justice Scalia and the Eastern District of Texas.

The Eastern District of Texas, especially over the past year, has been criticized by many who believe that defendants are at an extreme disadvantage in patent infringement cases filed there, according to Austin V&E Associate Joseph Gray, who specializes in Intellectual Property litigation. He points out that Justice Scalia, during oral argument at the Supreme Court in eBay v. MercExchange on March 29, 2006, even referred to Marshall, Texas, (also in the Eastern District of Texas) as a "renegade jurisdiction" when counsel for eBay noted that "no patent has ever been declared invalid in that jurisdiction.…"

 

[Voyager6]

In light of the distinct possibility that Tivo's "389" patent will be invalidated by the PTO, do you really think that filing suit against Verizon and AT&T was a good move? The legal costs fighting these two giants will be staggering especially with the ongoing legal battle with E*.

 

[Juan]

TiVo has $250 million in cash, no debt, and a very low cash burn rate.

Microsoft recently filed a patent infringement suit against Tom Tom. Were they just trying to stay afloat or were they making a smart business move? Is filing a lawsuit to protect intellectual property an act of desperation? Is obtaining a patent an act of desperation? I mean, if a company isn't going to protect a patent then why bother to get one?

that because they have not been developing new products...they just have to pay retainer fees to their legal council

 

[sampatterson]

I would guess that AT&T will soon slap them back as I am sure that TIVO somehow infringes on the vast patent portfolio owned/controlled by AT&T - this will force cross licensing then for $0.

 

[kvnfl]

This is extortion, pure and simple. Comcast now delivers Tivo software with their DVRs. AT&T and Verizon are not paying to play and that ounce of blood must be extract somehow.

 

[JPL]

TiVo has $250 million in cash, no debt, and a very low cash burn rate.

Microsoft recently filed a patent infringement suit against Tom Tom. Were they just trying to stay afloat or were they making a smart business move? Is filing a lawsuit to protect intellectual property an act of desperation? Is obtaining a patent an act of desperation? I mean, if a company isn't going to protect a patent then why bother to get one?

You mean aside from the fact that Tivo ran a net loss of 7.7 Million in 2009 YTD? The big difference between Microsoft and Tivo? Microsoft is profitable... Tivo isn't. Tivo is a tiny company, losing money, with a small cult following. Microsoft is one of the world's largest, and most profitable companies. You're talking apples and oranges here.

Besides, when it comes to intellectual property, the courts tend to shy away from the whole 'look and feel' arguments. When Microsoft first came out with Windows, Apple sued them for infringement base on the 'look and feel' argument. That was summarily rejected, because it's too vague (especially since Apple didn't develop the architecture surrounding their interface - Xerox did). The courts asked Apple to specify - what specifically in their interface could really be seen as intellectual property. Answer - the trash can. Which is the reason that Windows uses a recycle bin in their interface.

Tivo didn't start the DVR industry. There were predecessors (albeit not as successful out of the gate). And they're not the only ones with over-shoot compensation. The piece that they have patented, like I said, has to do with the algorithm which determines how much to compensate based on the use. Verizon's DVR doesn't have that.

Protecting intellectual property is fine, but I just don't see the merit in that one filing. I just don't believe that Tivo has a case.

 

[JPL]

Just FYI, here are some of the details of that one particular patent:

Automatic playback overshoot correction system - Patent 7493015

Again the patent isn't on over-shoot compensation per se. It's on the algorithm that learns from the user where to place the buffer when coming out of ffwd.

 

[scooger]

I suspect tivo will be getting an introduction to ATT and Verizon's patent portfolio shortly. In this instance - a cross license is the outcome. And I suspect some BellHead patent attorneys might look to take a pound of flesj out of tivo.

 

[Thomas22]

Protecting intellectual property is fine, but I just don't see the merit in that one filing. I just don't believe that Tivo has a case.

You may be right. I don't know enough about it. The discovery process will reveal the truth.