Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

TiVo vs EchoStar: Echostar found to be in Contempt


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
2011 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   Curtis52

Curtis52

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,487 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 02 June 2009 - 02:52 PM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
MARSHALL DIVISION
TIVO INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
DISH NETWORK CORPORATION,
et al.,
Defendants.
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:04-CV-01 (DF)
AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and in accordance with the jury verdict delivered on April 13, 2006 and the Federal Circuit mandate issued April 18, 2008, and with the Court’s contemporaneously filed opinions and orders, the Court hereby enters judgment for Plaintiff against Defendants for willful infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,233,389 (“the ’389 Patent”) claims 31 and 61 (“the Infringed Claims”) by Defendants’ following DVR receivers (collectively the “Infringing Products”): DP-501, DP-508, DP-510, DP-522, DP-625, DP-721, DP-921, and DP-942. The jury in this case found EchoStar’s infringement to be willful, but the Court, finding that Echostar did not act in bad faith and that this is not an “exceptional case,” has determined that there should be no enhancement of damages and no award of attorneys fees pursuant
to 35 U.S.C. Sections 284 and 285. The Court also enters judgment for Plaintiff on Defendants’ counterclaims for declaratory judgment of non-infringement, invalidity, and unenforceability.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Plaintiff shall have and recover from Defendants,
jointly and severally, the total sum of $73,991,964.00, together with prejudgment interest at the rateof prime, said prejudgment interest in the total sum of $5,367,544.00, together with supplemental damages in the amount of $10,317,108.00, together with post-judgment interest on the entire sum calculated pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. In addition, Plaintiff shall have and recover from
Defendants, jointly and severally, the sum of $103,068,836 in damages accrued during the stay of this Court’s injunction, together with post-judgment interest on that sum calculated pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The amounts awarded in this judgment shall bear interest from the date of judgment at the lawful federal rate.

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, selling, or importing 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.

Defendants are hereby FURTHER ORDERED to, within thirty (30) days of the issuance
of this order, disable the DVR functionality (i.e., disable all storage to and playback from a hard disk drive of television data) in all but 192,708 units of the Infringing Products that have been placed with an end-user or subscriber. The DVR functionality, storage to and playback from a hard disk drive, shall not be enabled in any new placements of the Infringing Products.

Defendants shall forthwith provide written notice of this judgment, and the injunction
ordered herein, to their officers, directors, agents, servants, representatives, attorneys, employees,subsidiaries and affiliates, and those persons in active concert or participation with them, including any and all manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and service providers who have been involved in the making, using, selling, offering for sale or importing of any Infringing Products, and to all other persons or entities involved in any way with the making, using, selling, offering for sale or importing of any Infringing Products. Defendants shall take whatever means are necessary or appropriate to
ensure that this order is properly complied with. This injunction shall run until the expiration of the ’389 Patent.

It is FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall inform this Court of any further attempt
to design around the ’389 Patent and shall seek approval from this Court before any such design- around is implemented.

This Court retains jurisdiction over Defendants to enforce any and all aspects of this
Judgment and Permanent Injunction, including the award of monetary sanctions for EchoStar’s contempt of this Court’s injunction.

The Court further retains jurisdiction to award Plaintiff amounts for supplemental damages, interest, costs, attorneys fees and such other or further relief as may be just and proper. All relief not specifically granted herein is denied. All pending motions not previously ruled on are denied. This is a Final Judgment and is appealable.

SIGNED this second day of June, 2009

Edited by Curtis52, 02 June 2009 - 03:11 PM.


...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#2 OFFLINE   Curtis0620

Curtis0620

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,436 posts
Joined: Apr 22, 2002

Posted 02 June 2009 - 03:03 PM

TiVo share price is shooting up in after hours.

#3 OFFLINE   Michael P

Michael P

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,909 posts
Joined: Oct 27, 2004

Posted 02 June 2009 - 03:46 PM

So does this affect the other models not on the infringing list?
An E* subscriber continuously since February 1997.

#4 OFFLINE   Richard King

Richard King

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 21,331 posts
Joined: Mar 25, 2002

Posted 02 June 2009 - 03:48 PM

Tivo is only up 45% after hours. :eek2:
10 days of Tivo vs. 10 days of Dish.
Posted Image Posted Image

Edited by Richard King, 02 June 2009 - 04:08 PM.

The Pump Don't Work 'cause the Vandals Took the Handles.

#5 OFFLINE   Lostinspace

Lostinspace

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 60 posts
Joined: Oct 24, 2007

Posted 02 June 2009 - 03:52 PM

$187,373,908 and counting. OUCH.

#6 OFFLINE   Curtis52

Curtis52

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 1,487 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 02 June 2009 - 03:53 PM

So does this affect the other models not on the infringing list?

There would need to be another contempt hearing to look at the newer models. The chances are that they use the same infringed processes.

#7 OFFLINE   Curtis52

Curtis52

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 1,487 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 02 June 2009 - 03:55 PM

$187,373,908 and counting. OUCH.

Plus interest back several years and the sanctions for contempt haven't even been set yet. That happens in July.

#8 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,293 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:03 PM

Well, we should have this resolved in another 6 to 8 months and 600 posts. But IMHO the critical wording here is likely to be:

...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...from making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing in the United 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.

Whether that means the software in the 922 should make for some interesting discussion. Regardless, my two 508's stored in a closet are doorstops unless Charlie can come to some agreement with TiVo.

"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#9 OFFLINE   Richard King

Richard King

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 21,331 posts
Joined: Mar 25, 2002

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:05 PM

TIVO statement:
http://custom.market...B-ADBAE7AA395E}

ALVISO, Calif., June 2, 2009 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- TiVo Inc. (TIVO), the creator of and a leader in television products and services for digital video recorders (DVR), offered the following statement today regarding the decision by the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, in the lawsuit against EchoStar Communications Corporation: "We are extremely gratified by the Court's well reasoned and thorough decision, in which it rejected EchoStar's attempted workaround claim regarding the TiVo patent, found EchoStar to be in contempt of court and ordered the permanent injunction fully enforced. In addition, the Court's award of an additional $103 million plus interest through April 2008 makes this victory all the more important. EchoStar may attempt to further delay this case but we are very pleased the Court has made it clear that there are major ramifications for continued infringement."

More...

Edited by Tom Robertson, 02 June 2009 - 04:57 PM.
fixed link

The Pump Don't Work 'cause the Vandals Took the Handles.

#10 OFFLINE   bobukcat

bobukcat

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,963 posts
Joined: Dec 20, 2005

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:08 PM

This injunction shall run until the expiration of the ’389 Patent.


I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere in the ridiculously long previous thread on this subject but when does that '389 patent expire?

#11 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:08 PM

Curtis52, thanks for the finding and the post!

I've closed the other discussion thread with a pointer to here.

Cheers,
Tom

Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)


#12 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:09 PM

I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere in the ridiculously long previous thread on this subject but when does that '389 patent expire?


I think something like 2017/2018?

Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)


#13 OFFLINE   Curtis52

Curtis52

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 1,487 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:13 PM

I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere in the ridiculously long previous thread on this subject but when does that '389 patent expire?

07-30-2018

#14 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,293 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:17 PM

So does this mean that the new Dish Network, which is theoretically independent of the new Echostar which may not have any lawful DVR's to sell to Dish, can start offering TiVo products?

"In a hundred years there'll be a whole new set of people."
"Always poke the bears. They sleep too much for their own good."

"If you're good enough, they'll talk about you." - Tom Harmon
A GEEZER who remembers watching TV in 1951 and was an Echostar customer from 1988 to 2008, now a Dish Network customer.
My AV Setup
My Slingbox Pro HD Experience
My Blog: The Redwood Guardian


#15 OFFLINE   Tom Robertson

Tom Robertson

    Lifetime Achiever

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,245 posts
Joined: Nov 15, 2005

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:20 PM

So does this mean that the new Dish Network, which is theoretically independent of the new Echostar which may not have any lawful DVR's to sell to Dish, can start offering TiVo products?


I'm guessing at this point, Dish/Echostar had better settle on an agreement with TiVo in 29 days...

Cuz I bet Dish won't be able to get another stay and won't be able to get the units replaced in 30 days, and won't be able to get TiVo units out in 30 days either...

Cheers,
Tom

Go Packers!

My real treasures: 5 Grandchildren - S, D, M, M, C ; Now 5! Great-Grandtibbers - B, H, J, A, and M (Born 7/31/2011)


#16 OFFLINE   bobukcat

bobukcat

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,963 posts
Joined: Dec 20, 2005

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:20 PM

07-30-2018


Thanks, obviously none of these receivers are going to be usable at that point anyway. It just gets curiouser and curiouser.....I predict a settlement (in the next 18 months or 1200 posts) :lol:

#17 OFFLINE   bobukcat

bobukcat

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,963 posts
Joined: Dec 20, 2005

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:21 PM

So does this mean that the new Dish Network, which is theoretically independent of the new Echostar which may not have any lawful DVR's to sell to Dish, can start offering TiVo products?


LOL - that'll be the day! :eek2:

#18 OFFLINE   tnsprin

tnsprin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,129 posts
Joined: Mar 15, 2003

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:26 PM

I am sure that Dish has had some plans in mind if they lost this contempt case.

I suspect that for one think they will push to have the Tivo patent ruled on by the PTO. That was on hold I think.

But obviously they have to do something for the DVR's they have been ruled as violating. This includes most of the SD receivers they have in service. If they allow them all to be disabled for more than a little while, they will be losing lots of customers. I don't know if they have another design around ready that think they can get the judge to allow. Replacing all the SD DVR's is way to expensive and iffy since the other current DVR receivers may also be ruled against in the future if nothing changes.

Of course they may just give in and license Tivo's patent.

So we need to hear something from Dish before 30 days are out on what they plan to do.

Edited by tnsprin, 02 June 2009 - 04:33 PM.

Ex Dish subscriber
Fios TV subscriber on 3/8/10

#19 OFFLINE   Curtis52

Curtis52

    Hall Of Fame

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 1,487 posts
Joined: Oct 13, 2003

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:32 PM

I am sure that Dish has had some plans in mind if they lost this contempt case.

I suspect that for one think they will push to have the Tivo patent ruled on. That was on hold.

It isn't on hold. A patent examiner is looking at Dish's latest reexamination request. Dish lost the previous reexamination at the patent office. It doesn't matter though. A patent reexamination isn't final until all appeals are exhausted. That can take years. It can go all the way to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the law requires that the patent be considered valid.

#20 OFFLINE   phrelin

phrelin

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,293 posts
  • LocationNorthern California Redwoods
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Posted 02 June 2009 - 04:32 PM

Hmmmm. Well I see a possible scenario like this. TiVo offers a deal to Dish Network where it would license Dish Network for it's customers to use whatever Echostar boxes it has sold or leased or will sell or lease and TiVo would start developing products for Dish Network. Charlie and any other officer or employee associated with both Echostar and Dish would face a conflict of interest and couldn't participate in the decision making.




spam firewall