1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

TiVo vs. Echostar Court Case: Post Hearing Discussion

Discussion in 'Legislative and Regulatory Issues' started by Tom Robertson, Feb 17, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Feb 17, 2009 #1 of 1468
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    James has started the closed summary and filings thread, here is where we can discuss the TiVo vs. Echostar trials and tribbles. :)

    Please, post your thoughts about the trial(s), the situation, the filings, etc. If you find links of interest, post them here too. James will continue to add to his summary thread, linking to key posts of information.

    As always, remember please be polite. DBStalkers want healthy discussion, not member bashing.

    So no insults to other members... Of any kind. Violators will be eaten (banned from this thread.) :) And/or their posts will be.

    This might be your only warning (well, aside from the many warnings we've already done in other threads, PMs, the DBSTalk.com User Agreement, etc.)

    If you see an offensive post, please share it with the moderators via the "Report Post Button", [​IMG]. We'd rather clean up just one post than to have to clean up a public spat.

    Thanks for your help and understanding,
    Tom
     
  2. Feb 17, 2009 #2 of 1468
    Mainer_ayah

    Mainer_ayah AllStar

    91
    0
    Jun 24, 2008
    Word I'm getting from the courtroom is that Echostar is getting hammered.

    What are all of you hearing?
     
  3. Feb 17, 2009 #3 of 1468
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Is there any form of live feed or recap? That's gotta be interesting.

    Thanks,
    Tom
     
  4. Feb 17, 2009 #4 of 1468
    Mainer_ayah

    Mainer_ayah AllStar

    91
    0
    Jun 24, 2008
    Just what you can get on the phone during breaks from those that are there.
    I'm sure a court reporter or two will publish an article tonight. There is a paper in Texarkana that usually has someone there.
     
  5. Feb 17, 2009 #5 of 1468
    jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    I recall at the end of hearing day 9/4/08 some TiVo investors blogged from the courtroom that E* was hammered so badly by the judge...

    What I learned was today, Charlie just made a killing on the Sirius Radio deal after paying $0.20 on the dollar of part of their matured loans a few months ago, and now get paid in full by the D* parent company.

    I think Charlie is in the Texas town just to make sure his team does not waste his money on the local hotels and diners:)
     
  6. Feb 17, 2009 #6 of 1468
    Mainer_ayah

    Mainer_ayah AllStar

    91
    0
    Jun 24, 2008
    First, what has any of that got to do with the topic? Second, FYI, Charlie wasn't in TX today, but he will be taking the stand tomorrow.
     
  7. Feb 17, 2009 #7 of 1468
    nobody99

    nobody99 Icon

    807
    0
    May 20, 2008
    Yeah, they will need that money soon to pay TiVo :lol: So, in effect, TiVo just made a killing on Sirius' debt.
     
  8. Feb 17, 2009 #8 of 1468
    Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    287
    Jun 18, 2006
    :backtotop please folks. We do not want to issue infractions.
     
  9. Feb 17, 2009 #9 of 1468
    jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Any news release to that fact?
     
  10. Feb 17, 2009 #10 of 1468
    jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    So Charlie will be there tomorrow to make sure his team dose not waste his money on the hotels and diners:)
     
  11. Feb 17, 2009 #11 of 1468
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    We don't need to discuss Sirius XM in this thread. Thanks.
     
  12. Feb 17, 2009 #12 of 1468
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    Read the rest at Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=TIVO:US&sid=agR09dwBlFnU

    Not that anyone really expected a quick ruling on this, but the request for extra written arguments did surprise me a bit.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  13. Feb 17, 2009 #13 of 1468
    jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    I agree. The only thing I can think of is he wants to delay this thing as much as possible to see how the USPTO may or may not invalidate TiVo's patent in their re-examination.
     
  14. Feb 17, 2009 #14 of 1468
    CuriousMark

    CuriousMark Icon

    505
    0
    May 21, 2008
    I thought this part was funny.
    So dish "agreed" to pay the money the court ordered them to pay, but didn't "agree" to shut off the DVRs the court ordered them to shut off. It almost makes it sound like following court orders is optional.

    Applying a different spin the article could just as easily have said that Dish was "forced" to pay $104 million, but did not owe any more money because those DVR units were updated with new software which Dish believes is no longer infringing on the TiVo patent.

    The phrase caught my eye because it came across to me as if the author thought that following a court order is optional.

    In any event, I am guessing that the extra filings will be needed because the pre-hearing filings he has in front of him are so divergent, and the judge realizes he won't be able to use either set. This thing has not gone quickly so far, so I don't see any reason for it to accelerate now.
     
  15. Feb 17, 2009 #15 of 1468
    CuriousMark

    CuriousMark Icon

    505
    0
    May 21, 2008
    You think he want to wait years? Didn't you yourself post that the courts rely on the rule of the case, independent of what goes on at USPTO until all of their patent review appeal processes are complete? Perhaps not, that would not support your current contention, but I know I saw it here, even if you weren't the one posting it.

    No, it make more sense that the judge wants the two sides inputs after the hearing is done and some questions are more settled. Then he can take his time and come to a verdict that will stand up to the inevitable appeal that will follow no matter what he decides.
     
  16. Feb 17, 2009 #16 of 1468
    Mainer_ayah

    Mainer_ayah AllStar

    91
    0
    Jun 24, 2008
    My people in the courtroom have no initial recollection of the points made in that report. They are currently reviewing their extemporaneously recorded, but extremely accurate notes to see if they can support or deny the information in that article.
     
  17. Feb 17, 2009 #17 of 1468
    nobody99

    nobody99 Icon

    807
    0
    May 20, 2008
    It's amazing. Countless times you have told us that certain actions by the judge would cause the case to be immediately appealable.

    Now you are suggesting that the judge ignore well-established case law (the patent is presumed valid until due process is completed, including appeals of the re-exam), and also ignore his own order that the question of patent validity was not allowed.
     
  18. Feb 17, 2009 #18 of 1468
    jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Please do that, a reporter can make as many mistakes as any one of us, at least on occasion:)
     
  19. Feb 17, 2009 #19 of 1468
    space86

    space86 Icon

    514
    0
    May 4, 2007
    Question if TiVo was to get the courts to shutdown all of Dish Network's
    DVR's would not Dish lose a lot of customers to Directv?
     
  20. Feb 17, 2009 #20 of 1468
    jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    As for the other point, what I said was a ruling on the patent validity by the court (or a jury) in a patent case is independent of the decision by the USPTO on the patent validity.

    But whether the patent itself is valid by the USPTO will most certainly have impact on the court's contempt decision and remedies.

    On 9/4/08 we learned even if E* was not in contempt, E* still would have owed TiVo at least $16M additional damages. But at that time the USPTO had yet decided to grant E*'s request to re-examine the TiVo's two patent claims at issue.

    Now the USPTO will decide if the TiVo's two claims are valid or not, if the decision ends up in E*'s favor, a ruling by the judge now on the contempt issue (whether a contempt or not) will be awkward at best, and also the additional $16M damages should no longer apply, and the case would be better put on hold until TiVo goes through its own appeal and only if TiVo succeeds in reinstating the patent claims.

    Of course the above is just my speculation, neither of you have to agree.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page