TIVO lawsuit update

[dgordo]

Folks let's remember the hardware part is over, Tivo can request a retry, but not only it will take a lot more time, the chance of success is much less now the court opinion is given.

The opinion from the appeals court has no effect on the success of the hardware case. Did you read it? All it did was clarify the standard to be used to determine infringement.

On the software part, regardless whose burden of proof, if E* is truthful that their new software does not infringe on the patent, then they should be able to prove it to the court. The standard of proof maybe debateable but I think if E* offers their non-infringing code to the court, it is up to Tivo to prove they are still infringing code.

How many times do I have to repeat that in this case the burden is on dish to prove they are not infringing because of the previous decision?

So the only thing you guys can count on is if E* was bluffing. If so E* only have themselve to blame.

Its entirely possible that the believe they have software that doesn't infringe the Tivo patent but it does. From the very beginning they made that claim. That doesn't mean they are bluffing, just wrong.

I just found it funny everyone is trying to hope things turn out the way he wants to be not looking at the factual statements made here in the past day.

This hasn't turned out as I wanted in any way, I am echostar shareholder. Everything I have stated is factual and clearly everything Greg Brinson has stated is factual.

I say it again, the only thing you have to hold on to is if E* is indeed bluffing, then as I said they only have themselves to blame. Clear enough?

I believe I have addressed this.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

So when is this law suit Done and over with?

 

[dgordo]

So when is this law suit Done and over with?

No way to know, depends on several factors.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

No way to know, depends on several factors.

With in a year ? Or are we talking years and years?

 

[reallyniceguy]

So.. um does this mean that tivo will start to sue computer manufacturers for having dvrs and cable companies that dont carry tivo? How about televisions that carry dvrs that are not tivo based?

 

[dgordo]

With in a year ? Or are we talking years and years?

If they full appeals court denies the echostar appeal and tivo refuses to continue with the hardware claim, it will be over in a few months.

 

[Hemi 6.1]

If they full appeals court denies the echostar appeal and tivo refuses to continue with the hardware claim, it will be over in a few months.

I wonder how much the Lawyers are making on this?

 

[haertig]

Large companies engage in "preventative patenting" all the time. Engineers come up with ideas, write code to implement it, and the company tries to sell it. Those of us coming up with features and algorithms do not sit there all day reviewing millions and millions of other companies software patents. I am talking honest companies here, not ones that deliberately steal others code or ideas. You never really know if some bozo somewhere managed to patent the idea that 1+1=2.

So to defend, big companies try to patent lots and lots of stuff. Not necessarily even stuff they plan to use themselves. They patent stuff that they think OTHERS might want to use. So, if you eventually get called on by that bozo with the 1+1=2 patent, you trade him free use of your 2+3=5 patent for the use of his patent. I know this is all really stupid, but that's what happens big company to big company.

I would not be at all surprised that Dish didn't hold some patents where Tivo has similar ideas they're planning to implement. Might be a surprise coming up for Tivo, or maybe they're already in negotiations now. Or Dish could just be stupid and got left holding the bag.

 

[vegassatellite]

TIVO is a bunch of fools. They wasted all this time on a stupid 100 mil lawsuit when they could have made a killing by manufacturing their own brand of cable STBs and sold them to cable companies and compete against Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta. Since most cable systems have return path, their boxes would be awesome additions to the cable world.

 

[jacmyoung]

The opinion from the appeals court has no effect on the success of the hardware case. Did you read it? All it did was clarify the standard to be used to determine infringement.



How many times do I have to repeat that in this case the burden is on dish to prove they are not infringing because of the previous decision?...

You've got be kidding me right? The appeals court threw out the jury verdict on the hardware infringement "becasue of a failure of proof of literal infringement." The appeals court also disallowed the upholding of the verdict based on "the doctrine of equivalents" in the event the "proof of literal infringement" fails, as argued by Tivo. However the appeals court left door open for Tivo to seek a retry of the hardware case solely "under the doctrine of equivalents." Meaning Tivo must seek a new jury trial.

And yes even if the burden of proof is on E* their new software does not infringe the patent, when E* makes a public statement clearly indicating so, are you to believe there is no way they are telling the truth or can be correct? If I hand over a bunch of codes to the judge and spell out for him exactly why the new codes do not infringe on the patent, what more burden of proof do you need?

Now Tivo of course will have their fair chance to scrutinize the codes and try to prove otherwise, but still are you to tell me before even you know what those codes are that there is no way in hell E* may be correct?

BTW, please don't disguise yourselve as an E* stockholder to appear objective, you should have been satisfied by the near 10% rise of E* stocks had you been what you said you were.

I am certainly not predicting winner and loser here, just laying out the facts. Things can go different ways, but to insist E* has lost everything, at this juncture it is simply not factual.

 

[dgordo]

You've got be kidding me right? The appeals court threw out the jury verdict on the hardware infringement "becasue of a failure of proof of literal infringement." The appeals court however left door open for Tivo to seek a retry of the hardware case "under the doctrine of equivalents."

And yes even if the burden of proof is on E* their new software does not infringe the patent, when E* makes a public statement clearly indicating so, are you to believe there is no way they are telling the truth or can be correct? If I hand over a bunch of codes to the judge and spell out for him exactly why the new codes do not infringe on the patent, what more burden of proof do you need?

Now Tivo of course will have their fair chance to scrutinize the codes and try to prove otherwise, but still are you to tell me before even you know what those codes are that there is no way in hell E* may be correct?

"we could uphold the judgment on the basis of the doctrine of equivalents only if we were to conclude that no reasonable jury, given proper instructions, could reach any verdict other than to find infringement by equivalents. The parties, however, have not briefed that issue in any detail, and we therefore do not address it. More generally, we do not decide what further proceedings, if any, are appropriate in the district court regarding the equivalents issue. Instead, we leave that issue for the district court to resolve in the event that, on remand, TiVo decides to continue to pursue the hardware claims in light of this decision."

Like I said, Its entirely possible that they believe they have software that doesn't infringe the Tivo patent but it does. From the very beginning they made that claim. No one knows what the software looks like. Dish doesnt have a good record here.

 

[jacmyoung]

You left out this part: "...Second, we have construed two of the claim limitations more restrictively than the trial court’s instructions permitted. For that reason, even if the jury had reached a verdict with respect to the doctrine of equivalents we could not sustain that verdict merely upon finding that substantial evidence supported it..."

So if the lawsuit were to proceed with a verdict based on "the doctrine of equivalents", whatever it might be, the appeals court would not have been able to sustain it simply becasue of the limitations applied in this lawsuit. Now I am no lawyer, I don't know if the judge is allowed to modify the instructions under the same lawsuit at his pleasure. If so it will not look fair to me. Basically he will be saying you can make only one verdict under my rules, but if your verdict shall be overturned, I may change the rules so you get a second chance. Beside, the appeals court had already determined the limitations for this lawsuit to be more restrictive than the instructions given by the trial court judge anyway, so even if he makes any instructional changes, it will not change the appeals court ruling (that a verdict based on the doctrine of equivalents can not be sustained in this lawsuit) due to the limitations of this lawsuit as interpreted by the appeals court.

As far as whether E* can or can not prove the software part, I think we have run the course, it is your opinion that E* can not prove it, not because you have seen the codes and determined so, rather based on past experience, but keep in mind that is an opinion drawn, not fact. An opinion is for us to debate, not for the court to render verdict.

 

[Buzzdar]

Yay just means another price increase each year for the next 100.

 

[Ken F]

TIVO is a bunch of fools. They wasted all this time on a stupid 100 mil lawsuit when they could have made a killing by manufacturing their own brand of cable STBs and sold them to cable companies and compete against Motorola and Scientific-Atlanta. Since most cable systems have return path, their boxes would be awesome additions to the cable world.

Unfortunately, until fairly recently, the Motorola and Scientific platforms were completely proprietary. They still are, to some extent.

 

[dgordo]

You left out this part: "...Second, we have construed two of the claim limitations more restrictively than the trial court’s instructions permitted. For that reason, even if the jury had reached a verdict with respect to the doctrine of equivalents we could not sustain that verdict merely upon finding that substantial evidence supported it..."

So if the lawsuit was to proceed with a verdict based on "the doctrine of equivalents", whatever it maybe, the appeals court would not be able to sustain it simply becasue of the limitations/instructions applied in this lawsuit. Now I am no lawyer, I don't know if the judge is allowed to modify the instructions under the same lawsuit at his pleasure. If so it will not look fair to me. Basically he will be saying you can make only one verdict under my rules, but if your verdict shall be overturned, I may change the rules so you get a second chance. Beside, the appeals court had already determined the limitations for this lawsuit to be more restrictive than the instructions given by the court judge anyway, so even if he makes any instructional changes, it will not change the appeals court ruling (that a verdict based on the doctrine of equivalents can not be sustained in this lawsuit) due to their own interpretation of the limitations of this lawsuit.

As far as whether E* can or can not prove the software part, I think we have run the course, it is your opinion that E* can not prove it, not because you have seen the codes and determined so, rather based on past experience, but keep in mind that is an opinion drawn, not fact. An opinion is for us to debate, not for the court to render verdict.

Fair enough, we'll disagree.

The doctrine of equivalents allows the court to find infringement even if the device does not fall within the scope of the patent but is still equivalent to the patented product.

There are two tests:

1. An invention is deemed equivalent if:
a. it performs substantially the same function
b. in substantially the same way
c. to accomplish the same substantial result

2. An invention is deemed equivalent if there is only an "insubstantial change" between each of the elements of the accused device or process and each of the elements of the patent claim.

From my experience, these are pretty easy tests to meet and why I fully expect Tivo to continue with the hardware claim.

 

[jacmyoung]

...The doctrine of equivalents allows the court to find infringement even if the device does not fall within the scope of the patent but is still equivalent to the patented product....

But the appeals court ruled that due to the limitations of this lawsuit, a verdict based on the above could not be sustained. Meaning Tivo has to seek a new trial.

I found it interesting Tivo has been silent so far. I wonder what cards do they hold now. I doubt Tivo wants a new trial or can afford another drawn out battle. But if they settle for what is now, they are actually the loser because the $100 mil or $200 mil will be all they can have. They need to win this lawsuit in its entirety to sustain a long term business.

Given the nature of Charlie it is possible he is bluffing, but not likely because they just came out with the OTA DVR based on probably the same new software. You don't bet your entire future on the prospect that Tivo may blink.

 

[dgordo]

But the appeals court ruled that due to the limitations of this lawsuit, a verdict based on the above could not be sustained. Meaning Tivo has to seek a new trial.

I found it interesting Tivo has been silent so far. I wonder what cards do they hold now. I doubt Tivo wants a new trial or can afford another drawn out battle. But if they settle for what is now, they are actually the loser because the $100 mil or $200 mil will be all they can have. They need to win this lawsuit in its entirety to sustain a long term business.

The court was saying that they could not sustain the verdict because of improper jury instructions, not based upon the standard. Either way, Tivo would need to seek a new trial.

 

[jmd102354]

hooray for tivo!!!

better to lead then follow chuckles

:up :up :up

 

[DishSubLA]

Is this the end of the TIVO lawsuit ? If so, what effect will it have on our bills and how soon ?

TiVo's Stock Soaring On Thursday

Yeah! Soaring to a massive $8! Still chump change for Charlie to acquire controlling interest or some kind of no cash deal to acquire Tivo. He'll probably wait until the appeal of the monetary damages is reviewed.

 

[Hall]

The TiVo people will point out the "poison pill" option that TiVo has in regards to a hostile takeover. I don't think they'd consider it hostile when they can walk away with a profit though. The company has been struggling for a number of years as their $8 stock price indicates.