TiVo's contempt motion is out

Thomas22

Thomas22

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 13, 2008
483
0
Cowtown
Here's some of it:

"EchoStar’s argument that the Court can no longer exert its authority over the DVRs once EchoStar has modified their software is not only an improper collateral attack on the injunction (as discussed above), it is wrong. The Federal Circuit has approved the district courts' authority to rule upon and to enjoin so-called “design arounds” in injunctions in patent infringement cases. For example, in Additive Controls & Measurement Systems, Inc. v. Flowdata, Inc., the district court issued an order enjoining the defendant “from making, using, and/or selling any positive displacement flowmeter” and prohibiting the defendant from engaging in commercial activities for any allegedly redesigned flowmeter product without obtaining the court’s permission in advance. 32 U.S.P.Q.2d 1747, 1757 (S.D. Tex. July 12, 1994), aff’d in part and rev’d in part on other grounds, 154 F.3d 1345, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 1998). The Federal Circuit affirmed this portion of the order, finding that “the district court reasonably concluded that such measures were necessary in this case to compel compliance with the court’s orders.” 154 F.3d at 1356. The Federal Circuit approved a similar provision, prohibiting the defendant from selling any allegedly redesigned device without obtaining the court's permission in advance, in Spindelfabrik Suessen-Schurr v. Schubert & Salzer Maschinenfabrik Aktiengesellschaft, 903 F.2d 1568, 1577 (Fed. Cir. 1990). In each of these cases, the defendants engaged in precisely the same tactic that EchoStar has here, claiming to have redesigned a product to avoid infringement and, in each case, the court determined that it had authority over the allegedly modified product. Spindelfabrik, 903 F.2d at 1571; Additive Controls, 32 U.S.P.Q.2d at 1755, 1757.

Here, EchoStar knew that it was modifying its software when the injunction issue was being briefed and argued before this Court. EchoStar could have and should have requested a “pre-clearance” provision like the ones above. EchoStar made the decision to go ahead in secrecy without any Court approval instead. But that did not make EchoStar's modified products automatically exempt from the Court's injunction. To the contrary, under the language of the injunction, they remained subject to the disablement requirement. To exempt them would require a decision by this Court, not by EchoStar. As EchoStar’s behavior confirms, the Court’s decision to issue a simple and unambiguous order, “disable the DVR functionality (i.e., disable all storage to and playback from a hard disk drive of television data) in [DP-501, DP-508, DP-510, DP-522, DP-625, DP-721, DP-921 and DP-942]” was a wise one. EchoStar’s decision to be less than candid with this Court and with the Federal Circuit – by seeking a stay of the injunction without disclosing its efforts to modify the software and then, if necessary in the future, using the software modifications as an argument for disregarding the injunction’s disablement provision – was made deliberately. While EchoStar may now be arguing that the spirit of the injunction allows for modified software, its previous positions with this Court and with the Federal Circuit coupled with its conduct show that it was attempting to circumvent the injunction, not comply with it. Such conduct constitutes contempt of court. "

.
.

"TiVo respectfully requests that the Court issue an Order holding EchoStar in contempt of the Permanent Injunction and requiring EchoStar to comply by disabling the DVR functionality within seven calendar days in the DVR receivers specified in the injunction (i.e., DP-501, DP- 508, DP-510, DP-522, DP-625, DP-721, DP-921 and DP-942). "
 
Jim S.

Jim S.

When someone asks you if you're a god, you say yes
Lifetime Supporter
Jan 2, 2006
5,497
1,007
FN11od
Meanwhile, the patent is still stupid.
 
riffjim4069

riffjim4069

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Apr 7, 2004
35,240
312
SatelliteGuystonfieldville, U.S.A.
Meanwhile, the patent is still stupid.
I agree the TiVo patents are "stupid", but I also feel that way about the speed limits placed on many rural highways. However, I still obey them! TiVo is going to shutdown the infringing DVRs, receive licensing fees 2-3 times those offered law-abiding companies, or both! At this point, E* needs to open their wallet and pay the TiVo their bribe before they go after the ViP series of DVRs.
 
N

nsafreak

SatelliteGuys Pro
Nov 7, 2004
528
13
Denver,Co
Didn't respond to the post when it started so I'll have to alter what I should have posted at the beginning:

Wild speculation about the future of E*'s DVRs continues after this post.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Cyclone

Cyclone

Proud Stiff Member
Supporting Founder
Sep 9, 2003
2,586
16
Maryland
So why in plain english does the old Dish DVR's violate the Tivo patent, but the new ones do not? I know dish "worked around" the violations, but what exactly is the violation?
 
iwc5893

iwc5893

SatelliteGuys Pro
Feb 1, 2007
2,178
0
The desert of WA, zip code EIEIO
AwJeezNotThisSheetAgain-763103.jpg
 
Thomas22

Thomas22

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 13, 2008
483
0
Cowtown
So why in plain english does the old Dish DVR's violate the Tivo patent, but the new ones do not? I know dish "worked around" the violations, but what exactly is the violation?
There has been no determination that the new model number DVRs do not infringe the patent. The new model numbers didn't exist at the time of the trial so it's no surprise they aren't specifically named in the injunction. However, the injunction prohibits slight variations.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT

Each Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof, are hereby restrained and enjoined, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d), from making, using, offering to sell or selling in the Untied States, the Infringing Products, either alone or in combination with any other product and all other products that are only colorably different therefrom in the context of the Infringed Claims, whether individually or in combination with other products or as a part of another product, and from otherwise infringing or inducing others to infringe the Infringed Claims of the ‘389 patent.
If I was a retailer I would get legal advice.
 
Juan

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
29,037
7,120
Moscow Russia
So why in plain english does the old Dish DVR's violate the Tivo patent, but the new ones do not? I know dish "worked around" the violations, but what exactly is the violation?
Maybe because Tivo didn't have a working MPEG-4 model?
 
Thomas22

Thomas22

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 13, 2008
483
0
Cowtown
Maybe because Tivo didn't have a working MPEG-4 model?
Irrelevent. TiVo's patent would be just as valid if TiVo had never built or sold a DVR. Also, TiVo's patent doesn't mention a particular version of MPEG.
 
Juan

Juan

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Sep 14, 2003
29,037
7,120
Moscow Russia
Irrelevent. TiVo's patent would be just as valid if TiVo had never built or sold a DVR. Also, TiVo's patent doesn't mention a particular version of MPEG.
So they have a patent on something they never invented
 
Thomas22

Thomas22

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 13, 2008
483
0
Cowtown
So they have a patent on something they never invented
Dish invented MPEG? Of course not. Neither did TiVo. Red herring. Totally irrelevant. It isn't about MPEG.
 
Last edited:
Zero327

Zero327

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 8, 2006
931
0
The Emerald City
Dish invented MPEG? Of course not. Neither did TiVo. Red herring. Totally irrelevant. It isn't about MPEG.

I should buy the patent to the remote control rewind button. Then I can sue Tivo.

So why in plain english does the old Dish DVR's violate the Tivo patent, but the new ones do not? I know dish "worked around" the violations, but what exactly is the violation?

Tivo claims they were the first to ever had thought of a magical box that you can record tv and rewind on... The court says it isn't a logical leap to make from VCRs with rewind buttons, to DVRs with rewind buttons. I say Folsom is a monday morning quarterback without a shred of common sense in his head.
 
Thomas22

Thomas22

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 13, 2008
483
0
Cowtown
The court says it isn't a logical leap to make from VCRs with rewind buttons, to DVRs with rewind buttons. I say Folsom is a monday morning quarterback without a shred of common sense in his head.
I guess the patent office is nuts too:

"In a setback to satellite operator Echostar, (NSDQ: DISH) the US Patent and Trademark Office has upheld the validity of TiVo’s (NSDQ: TIVO) “Time Warp” patent, which covers the simultaneous storage and playback of programs. EchoStar had requested that the patent be re-examined, as part of its effort to overturn a patent infringement judgment against the company. A statement released by TiVo states that the USPTO’s decision can not be appealed by EchoStar, though this doesn’t have any effect EchoStar’s appeal to the Federal Circuit."

Patent Office Upholds TiVo’s ‘Time Warp’ Patent; EchoStar’s Legal Appeal Continues | paidContent.org
 
HobbyTalk

HobbyTalk

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 4, 2007
434
206
SW Florida
You don't even want to go there as we all know how effective the Patent Office is on issuing sensible patents !sadroll
 
Thomas22

Thomas22

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Pro
Apr 13, 2008
483
0
Cowtown
You don't even want to go there as we all know how effective the Patent Office is on issuing sensible patents !sadroll
Couldn't Dish come up with a single reason why the patent office should invalidate TiVo's patent? I mean, it should have been easy right? They've got high priced lawyers and all.
 
dlsnyder

dlsnyder

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 8, 2003
1,825
3
Moreno Valley, CA
If my DVRs get disabled (a 508 and a 622) I am gone, and right away too. The WAF on a disabled DVR would force my move. Good thing FiOS is coming to my neighborhood soon. Gives me an excuse to switch.
 

Similar threads

R
Replies
6
Views
1K
rgarcia55556
R
Scott Greczkowski
Replies
3
Views
3K
Voyager6
Voyager6
G
Replies
2
Views
1K
dragon002
dragon002
J
Replies
10
Views
2K
Dishlover
D

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Top