Tivo hearing today?
- Thread starter danknapp76
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 246
- Views 27K
This is not a big surprise, I don't think Dish actually ever expected to be heard by the Supreme Court.
I am wondering however if Dish feels that they may lose the software dispute as well as I am hearing rumors that Dish has discontinued all standard definition DVR's. I am hearing new customers will be 622's instead of a SD DVR. (which to me would suck if you are a customer who only watches SD and dosen't have an HD set, as I am sure Dish will charge the customers the HD equipment fees each month.
Dish needs some good PR and needs it now. Unfortunately I don't see any light from the end of the tunnel.
I am wondering however if Dish feels that they may lose the software dispute as well as I am hearing rumors that Dish has discontinued all standard definition DVR's. I am hearing new customers will be 622's instead of a SD DVR. (which to me would suck if you are a customer who only watches SD and dosen't have an HD set, as I am sure Dish will charge the customers the HD equipment fees each month.
Dish needs some good PR and needs it now. Unfortunately I don't see any light from the end of the tunnel.
What's the difference in the way an SD DVR works and an HD DVR? In fact what's the difference in the way Dish's DVR works and the way any cable co. or Direc's DVR? Do they not all do the same thing and work the same as a Tivo? Why is Dish being sued and not the other guys?
What was the last SD DVR, the 625?Scott Greczkowski said:
Here is the issue, as simply put as possible:
DISH/SATS states they've changed their software so the receivers no longer infringe. That belief is hinged upon two issues regarding the claims and their construction in this patent case.
First, in the 50X DVR's, DISH/SATS states they no longer "parse" data, defined in the claim construction as any analysis of data. However, that "parsing" is still done in the form of PID filtering. You know, a transponder contains about 12 channels worth of data, and something has to analyze that data to form what the receiver understands as a "channel".
Second, and more important, the other claim which DISH/SATS says has been changed is automatic flow control of the data across buffers in the eight models of receivers which have been adjudicated. The claim construction for this is defined as the ability to allow the receiver to self-regulate. DISH/SATS states they no longer have any automatic flow control, but the document from outside counsel which DISH/SATS uses also says that the software must keep up with the incoming data, or in other words, find a way to self-regulate.
So it is entirely possible that the eight models of enjoined receivers that have been sold and modified since the Final Judgment and Injunction order could also be ordered disabled.
The only way around that is to start giving customers the models which have not been enjoined nor evaluated by the court, such as the 622 and 722, 612, etc.
Use of government power to get your way no matter how many people disagree with it is certainly extortion.
Not going to "get over" anything. What you Tivo wankers fail to realize is that is that this is more than just this one case. They somehow got a jury to believe that Dish stole something from Tivo that Tivo stole from Replay. And Tivo is going around to any company making DVRs claiming that they should be the sole arbiter of DVR technology. They somehow have made the bizarre leap of logic that they own the concept of the DVR and anyone who makes a competing product is somehow "infringing". Tivo is the Jesse Jackson of technology companies. Besides, your reply made no sense. Just because they won doesn't make it not extortion. Get a dictionary.
I agree Tivo's patents are a joke and should have been tossed out ages ago.. they never made the technologies, they just learned out to make a buck from it.. that does not equate into a fricken patent..
Your reply is typical but just let me state that I'm an *E sub and don't give a hoot in hell about this mess. Charlie took a chance and lost. Again, get over it.
Only in America do we get such ridiculous patents. Same with Verison suing Vonage. They didn't invent the technology, and some how got a patent in the USA for a specific use of it. These ridiculous patent applications were rejected overseas.
Perhaps I should get in on the action... lets see... there is a probably a patent for different variants of table salt, but I think I'll patent its use on dinner tables.
Perhaps I should get in on the action... lets see... there is a probably a patent for different variants of table salt, but I think I'll patent its use on dinner tables.
Whether you agree with the current patent system or not is irrelevant to this decision. I personally believe software patents should be limited to only half of the valid time compared to the conventional patents simply because how fast the new technologies may change.
But under the current system, E* did infringe on the TiVo's patent, and TiVo righfully should receive the payment.
And likewise, under the current system E* is allowed to design around the TiVo's patent. As long as the E* DVRs no longer infringe on the TiVo's patent anymore, they can continue be used as before. This is the law.
It is wrong for E* fans to argue the system was flawed and E* was a victim of the bad patent law, and it is also wrong for the TiVo's fans to insist the current system does not allow E* to work around the patent, both arguments are wrong.
I don't see any other way but for E* to wait for the lower court ruling on the contempt issue. Based on all the case law, E* is not in contempt because of the design around.
Put it this way, if TiVo could be so easily getting a patent on a DVR technology similar to many companies had done before them, then it should be just as easy for E* to come up with a different DVR technology that can do the same things yet not infringing on TiVo's patent.
It was stupid for E* to ignore TiVo's patent and used a similar DVR technology before, when they could have worked on their own DVR technology, it took a judgment of $74 million two years ago for E* to realize they needed to start to make their own.
Next the judge will decide the "extent of the design around", as he put it. Whether the E* design around was significant enough so it may not infringe on the same TiVo's patent. If the extent of the design around is only colorable, as the judge said on 9/4, E* is still in trouble, otherwise, E* will be fine. Therefore the anticipated ruling by the judge will be based on just that, the "extent of the design around", as the judge made it clear on 9/4, when he told the E* lead attorney, he could still find E* in contempt if the extent of the design around was only colorable, but only under such condition. The judge did not say he could find E* in contempt under any other conditions, only if the extent of the design around was not a good-faith one.
As much as all the TiVo fans want to read into what the judge had said on 9/4, one thing is clear, the only path the judge laid out to find E* in contempt, as he told the E* lawyer, was if the extent of the design around, in his view, is only colorable. Judge Folsom did not list a second reason to find E* in contempt, the above was the only reason he noted.
But under the current system, E* did infringe on the TiVo's patent, and TiVo righfully should receive the payment.
And likewise, under the current system E* is allowed to design around the TiVo's patent. As long as the E* DVRs no longer infringe on the TiVo's patent anymore, they can continue be used as before. This is the law.
It is wrong for E* fans to argue the system was flawed and E* was a victim of the bad patent law, and it is also wrong for the TiVo's fans to insist the current system does not allow E* to work around the patent, both arguments are wrong.
I don't see any other way but for E* to wait for the lower court ruling on the contempt issue. Based on all the case law, E* is not in contempt because of the design around.
Put it this way, if TiVo could be so easily getting a patent on a DVR technology similar to many companies had done before them, then it should be just as easy for E* to come up with a different DVR technology that can do the same things yet not infringing on TiVo's patent.
It was stupid for E* to ignore TiVo's patent and used a similar DVR technology before, when they could have worked on their own DVR technology, it took a judgment of $74 million two years ago for E* to realize they needed to start to make their own.
Next the judge will decide the "extent of the design around", as he put it. Whether the E* design around was significant enough so it may not infringe on the same TiVo's patent. If the extent of the design around is only colorable, as the judge said on 9/4, E* is still in trouble, otherwise, E* will be fine. Therefore the anticipated ruling by the judge will be based on just that, the "extent of the design around", as the judge made it clear on 9/4, when he told the E* lead attorney, he could still find E* in contempt if the extent of the design around was only colorable, but only under such condition. The judge did not say he could find E* in contempt under any other conditions, only if the extent of the design around was not a good-faith one.
As much as all the TiVo fans want to read into what the judge had said on 9/4, one thing is clear, the only path the judge laid out to find E* in contempt, as he told the E* lawyer, was if the extent of the design around, in his view, is only colorable. Judge Folsom did not list a second reason to find E* in contempt, the above was the only reason he noted.
Last edited:
They should have been doing this for a long time. Not only due to the patent case, but to start getting more people to MPEG4. Non VIP receivers should be discontinued, only offering the following:
211: Single TV Receiver
222: Dual Tuner Receiver
612: Single TV DVR
622: Dual Tuner SD DVR (upgradeable to HD)
722: Dual Tuner HD DVR
They the avoid the patent issue, and have a few million less STBs to swap out in the near future. Are the HD boxes really that much more expensive?
Couldn't agree more. The patent system has become a joke. You're better off patenting ideas and wait for someone else to do the engineering to perfect it. I don't see how that encourages innovation.
I've long wondered why the "Time Warp" patent isn't thrown out on false claims: It does not, in fact, warp time, it only records TV.
Last edited:
I'm glad I jumped from the Dish boat a while back, it seems like it keeps getting worse for Charlie and the gang.
Dish isn't going anywhere.... christ people... upwards of 13 million subscribers!
A lot of you fail to realize that the majority of subscribers don't even know about this lawsuit. Us satellite nerds have for a long time.... but the average TV watcher just continues to watch "So You Think You Can Dance" and "House" and doesn't give a flying rat's crap about this "news". This subscriber is not going anywhere.
Sure, it's going to hurt profit margins to an extent... but keep things in perspective.... this company has had 104 MILLION dollars rotting in an escrow account for years and is launching satellites every time a window of launch space becomes available.... any company with that kind of expendable cash flow is not in danger of going out of business any time soon.
A lot of you fail to realize that the majority of subscribers don't even know about this lawsuit. Us satellite nerds have for a long time.... but the average TV watcher just continues to watch "So You Think You Can Dance" and "House" and doesn't give a flying rat's crap about this "news". This subscriber is not going anywhere.
Sure, it's going to hurt profit margins to an extent... but keep things in perspective.... this company has had 104 MILLION dollars rotting in an escrow account for years and is launching satellites every time a window of launch space becomes available.... any company with that kind of expendable cash flow is not in danger of going out of business any time soon.
If Dish new they were probably going to lose in the TIVO case why didn't they pay in 06' now they haft to pay interest too, what a well run company! lol This would have put a new Satellite up for sure! Dish were is ur head! 
If Dish new they were probably going to lose in the TIVO case why didn't they pay in 06' now they haft to pay interest too, what a well run company! lol This would have put a new Satellite up for sure! Dish were is ur head!
E* had already "paid" the $74 million, by putting the money in the escrow two years ago, that is why now the amount is $104 million, after the interest. Only that now the money will finally go to TiVo, yes including the interest.
Why buy TiVo when E* has a design around? Once there is no contempt, TiVo will be worth very little.
Similar threads
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)
Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)
Latest posts
-
T
-
T
-
-
