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. Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    Well, if DISH/SATS was using a Media Switch in their implementation, then TiVo would have requested the bench hearing incorporate an evaluation of infringement of the Hardware Claims. Instead, Judge Folsom did want to incorporate the evaluation of the Hardware Claims, but TiVo asked that evaluation be removed, as DISH/SATS is not using the Media Switch.
    The Hardware Claims have some software elements. The Software Claims have some hardware elements. The PID filter is part of the hardware elements of the Software Claims.
    Just because windshield wipers exist does not mean a patent for intermittent wipers should be invalidated, because the wiper is the important piece and is prior art.

    It is continually a strawman to say "PID filters" are prior art, when they exist in both the process and apparatus of the Software Claims in TiVo's Time Warp patent. MOST patents contain elements which are PRIOR ART.

    Don't believe me? Take a look at SATS patent application for their "brute force" software implementation for time-shifting in a DVR. For some reason there are pieces of hardware in it.
     
  2. scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    6,384
    53
    Apr 22, 2002
    Youngsville NC

    TO keep bringing the PID filter in as your "parsing piece" is the TRUE Strawman.

    Face it gents - Tivo is REACHING to try to make their patent fit on Echostar's new software.


    The same general purpose PC I'm typing this on here at home also can function as a DVR with the PC tuner card I have. There ain't no "media switch" in it - just NTSC and ATSC tuners (with a PID filter, no less) and an MPEG encoder chip for the analog inputs, with software drivers and a program that is, at it's core, doing what Echostar says it's new software is doing.

    The PID filter arguement is a strawman. You know it , Tivo knows it, Echostar knows it, and if the judge can't see it - he shouldn't be a judge.
     
  3. Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    What other parsing does the input section do? The indexing is done in the media switch downstream of the input section. The PID filtering is done in the input section.
     
  4. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Are you sure this is what TiVo should go with, that the PID filter is in the input section?

    If so, the PID filter will just be part of that "input device", if so, we are now missing that "physical data source."

    Is that the final answer?:)
     
  5. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Does it matter? The parsing as described in the software claims is done outside of that "input device". Whatever and no matter how much "parsing" is done in that "input section" (input device) has nothing to do with this invention. The "physical data source" accepts broadcast data from that "input device", then does the parse, not as part of the input device, rather independent of it.

    That is why you cannot find another parser "well upstream" of the media switch in the patent figure, because even if such thing exists, it is not a part of the invention, therefore not a part of the patent figure. If the PID filter happens to be in that upstream parser, it is irrelevant as far as this invention is concerned, that is why it does not show up in that patent figure.
     
  6. Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    Wow
     
  7. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Since when you talk like Greg?:)

    Nice try my friend, that was in reference to the number of buffers used to achieve "automatic flow control.":)
     
  8. scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    6,384
    53
    Apr 22, 2002
    Youngsville NC
    That's exactly right -

    In the Tivo invention - it goes from the output of the PID filter, to the media switch where it gets the timestamp embedded, onto the disk buffer for storage / playback.

    In the Echostar invention - it goes from the PID filter output straight to the disk buffer, from where it goes for storage / playback.

    The playback processes are different too. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure it out.

    Between the two - there is more than a colorable difference on their approach to the same problem. And before somebody brings it up - order of the operations IS important.
     
  9. Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    It's getting hard to keep up.
     
  10. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    We need to remember always go back to the software claims, because only the software claims are at issue.

    What happened was Curtis52 finally said the PID filter is part of that "input section," now we go to the software claims, we can find where that "input section" is located, it is located in the first step, by the name of "input device."

    Per Curtis52's latest statement, the PID filter sits in that "input device" or one can say it IS that "input device," therefore the PID filter cannot be that "physical data source" at the same time.
     
  11. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    Confused? Having doubt? Guess what, if TiVo cannot clear up the confusion, or cannot remove the doubt, TiVo loses:)

    TiVo must prove by clear and convincing evidence, E* only needs to establish the doubt, or put it bluntly, E* only needs to succeed in confusing the heck out of the issue.

    In reality however, I think E* is as clear as it can be, and TiVo simply has no meaningful response.
     
  12. Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    There is no media switch in the software claims. Dish is trying to put one there but it just ain't there.
     
  13. Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    Where does it say that the input section and the physical data source are mutually exclusive?
     
  14. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    No, DISH never tried to put one in. We just used it to help our own debate, and it has been used on both sides.
     
  15. Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    Sure they are. They say they no longer do start code detection or indexing. Those are done by the media switch which is not in the software claims.
     
  16. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    "Start code detection and indexing" are not in the hardware claims either, yet parties had no problem using these terms.

    The only thing you can say is such terms were never applied to the software claims in the past, but this is not to say they cannot now be applied on the software claims. Because back then hardware claims were the focus of the appeal, E* never tried to address the software claims much.

    Now the software claims are the issue, you cannot say simply because the terms were not discussed in the context of the software claims last time, they may not be discussed now.

    What TiVo needs to do is to dispute E*'s new assertions head on, not to avoid such debate by simply brush them off as "irrelevant." Because then these terms should be irrelevant to the hardware claims back then too.
     
  17. Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    To fit the new software?

    ALL FIVE experts gave testimony during the trial (the old software) that PID filtering met the parse step of the first element of the Software Claims.

    Which means nothing is reaching as it is evidence that was presented before.
     
  18. jacmyoung

    jacmyoung Hall Of Fame

    6,544
    0
    Sep 8, 2006
    So what? As long as they no longer parse that "said video and audio data" (i.e. the start codes), the first step is no longer met.
     
  19. Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    Not confused at all. When all of the arguments are against the Hardware Claims, then TiVo automatically wins, as there is no doubt there weren't signficant changes made to anything regarding the Software Claims.
     
  20. Greg Bimson

    Greg Bimson Hall Of Fame

    3,918
    0
    May 5, 2003
    The "start codes" are not "said video and audio data".
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page