Yes. And that's all I can say about the subject, since I was involved in just such a case. (I actually had to check with a lawyer before I posted that previous sentence. Sigh.). Actually, Dish's products are all "new" in the eyes of the court. It's not like the injunction was already in effect when the very first infringing DVR was released by Dish. I think you are stuck on a moot point. And all that will happen on Sept. 4 is the judge will rule if his injunction should now be (not "meant to be", see Appellate Court ruling) taken word for word, letter for letter, or if there is a little wiggle room. Whoever loses will appeal, and Tivo will file a motion for contempt either way (and this outcome can be appealed). Note that E* doesn't have to initiate anything. An infringing company can continue to violate the injunction, and if the other company doesn't file for a contempt motion it cannot collect additional damages. The second point that some people are stuck on is the injunction wording. The exact wording doesn't matter. If the judge orders E* executives to kill their first born sons, they don't have to follow it even if the judge later finds them in contempt. The Appeals Court would eventually overturn the injunction (or at least provide clarification on it or modify it in less extreme cases). And if they don't, there are laws that prevent E* from carrying out the injunction. The injunction takes a back seat to existing case law and laws, not the other way around. I'm not a lawyer. I just see more of them than I want to.