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

TiVo vs EchoStar: Echostar found to be in Contempt

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by Curtis52, Jun 2, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jun 3, 2009 #141 of 2012
    CuriousMark

    CuriousMark Icon

    505
    0
    May 21, 2008
    It is true that we don't know the number, but the 4 million was the case year ago. To assume it is still 4 million means that new placements of the older DVR models have been equal to or faster than they have fallen out of service due to churn or been upgraded to the VIP models. I just find that hard to believe and believe the number has fallen over time. It still may be a very substantial number, or it may be a much smaller number. I don't know which, but would not be surprised to hear that it is the latter.

    Also, DVRs that are turned off become full featured receivers, so customers will still be able to receiver the service, just not use the DVR features. If Dish has a well advertised upgrade/replacement plan in place, many would probably stick it out if they knew the wait was not unacceptably long. Of course those are individual decisions, and we don't have a clue how those would shake out.
     
  2. Jun 3, 2009 #142 of 2012
    peak_reception

    peak_reception Icon

    961
    0
    Feb 10, 2008
    I hate to be the one to point this out Phrelin but actually you are the one with the most posts on this thread so far with 20. But who's counting? ;)
     
  3. Jun 3, 2009 #143 of 2012
    Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    I'm not sure it has been established that the DVRs are capable of bypassing the hard drive. The injunction doesn't allow use of a hard drive for storage or playback.
     
  4. Jun 3, 2009 #144 of 2012
    CuriousMark

    CuriousMark Icon

    505
    0
    May 21, 2008
    The patent claims are posted earlier in this or a previous thread on this site, search for claim 31 or claim 61. The specific process and / or apparatus that implements certain DVR features is covered in those claims. Dish follows that process in the operation of their DVRs. They tried to make some tweaks to avoid one or two of the multiple steps in the claims, but the judge found that the tweaks did not go far enough to avoid meeting the requirements of the patent claims.

    This is not a case of copying, as in copyright. Dish could have made changes to avoid other steps, although doing so would have been far more costly and time consuming. Dish could have gotten an independent lab to certify that their changes were adequate to avoid the patent, but didn't do that either. Finally they could have informed the court of their plans as they went along, but chose to keep it unannounced until after the appeals court had ruled.
     
  5. Jun 3, 2009 #145 of 2012
    CuriousMark

    CuriousMark Icon

    505
    0
    May 21, 2008
    I could be wrong, but I honestly believe they can find a way to bypass the hard drive, it doesn't seem at all technically difficult to do so. The same processor controls moving data to and from the hard drive over the same bus. I see no reason why it cannot simply move the data to the appropriate playback buffers directly.
     
  6. Jun 3, 2009 #146 of 2012
    HDlover

    HDlover Godfather

    310
    0
    Jul 28, 2006
    I guess this means I can't use my PC as a DVR without upsetting Tivo. :D
     
  7. Jun 3, 2009 #147 of 2012
    Ohioankev

    Ohioankev Legend

    214
    0
    Jan 19, 2006
    Oh man they'll flip a wig if they find out, especially if you connect your PC to your TV set. With the right DVR/PVR software you'll be guilty of the same infringements as DISH.

    According to the judge this DVR infringes on TiVo's patent and this service (now out of business since 2003) launched two months before TiVo ...guess who owns the Replay TV brand now... you guessed it DirecTV ... soon to be the only option for DVR technology through satellite.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReplayTV

    ReplayTV is a brand of digital video recorder (DVR), a term synonymous with personal video recorder (PVR). It is a consumer video device which allows users to capture television programming to internal hard disk storage for later viewing (and time shifting). The first ReplayTV model launched in January 1999, two months ahead of rival TiVo. After the sale of assets to DirecTV ReplayTV's only ongoing activity is maintenance of the guide service by D&M Holdings.

    Hmm ......
     
  8. Jun 3, 2009 #148 of 2012
    HDlover

    HDlover Godfather

    310
    0
    Jul 28, 2006
    I think IBM should sue Tivo, IBM started it.
     
  9. Jun 3, 2009 #149 of 2012
    scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    6,428
    59
    Apr 22, 2002
    Youngsville NC
    There was NO requirement for Dish to inform the Court about their modification attempt in the previous ruling until they did. Surely the judge should have realized that Dish was legally in the right to make such attempt.

    As it is - I feel the judge went too far in requiring his informed consent before they could make another change. If this had been the second or third attempt - then I could see it - but on only the first ?!?!
     
  10. Jun 3, 2009 #150 of 2012
    scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    6,428
    59
    Apr 22, 2002
    Youngsville NC
    Of TV data.


    I don't think program guide would fall under the same issue.
     
  11. Jun 3, 2009 #151 of 2012
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,103
    329
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I tried to keep count on the last couple of threads, but it just got to be too much. :sure: ;)

    And other than that, I'm pretty much done with this one until the appellate court actually does something.
     
  12. Jun 3, 2009 #152 of 2012
    nmetro

    nmetro Godfather

    946
    54
    Jul 11, 2006
    This was posted on The New York Times Site:

    DISH, EchoStar Win Stay Of TiVo Patent Award

    Article Tools Sponsored By
    By REUTERS
    Published: June 3, 2009

    Filed at 8:13 p.m. ET
    Skip to next paragraph Reuters

    LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Wednesday stayed a Texas court's order forcing set-top box maker EchoStar Corp and satellite pay TV provider DISH Network Corp to disable millions of digital video recorders that infringe on a patent held by TiVo Inc.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit temporarily halted execution of the judgment by U.S. District Judge David Folsom, and ordered TiVo to respond by June 10 to the motion for a stay pending appeal, the order showed.

    The move is the latest in a long-running court battle that resulted in a jury verdict in TiVo's favor in 2006, followed by an unsuccessful appeal by sister companies DISH and EchoStar.

    The jury awarded TiVo about $74 million in damages plus interest, for a total payment by EchoStar and DISH of $104 million.

    The stay comes a day after Folsom imposed additional damages of $103 million plus interest against DISH and EchoStar for continuing to infringe on TiVo's patent for "Time Warp" software -- which allows users to record one TV program while watching another -- while it appealed.

    In his final judgment, Folson gave EchoStar and DISH 30 days to disable all but about 192,000 DVRs distributed among its 13.6 million customers.

    DISH and Echostar made good on Wednesday on a pledge to appeal and secure a stay postponing execution of the order.

    "We are pleased that the Federal Appeals Court in Washington temporarily stayed the district court's order in the TiVo litigation," DISH and EchoStar said in a statement. "DISH Network customers can continue using their DVRs. We believe we have strong grounds for appeal."

    In a statement, TiVo said it was "confident" the appeals court would again uphold Folsom "and not permit EchoStar to further delay this case once it has an opportunity to consider TiVo's response and EchoStar's motion on the ... stay."

    DISH was formerly known as EchoStar Communications Corp. It spun off its technology assets over a year ago, including its set-top box division, to create EchoStar Corp.

    The news dampened trading in TiVo shares, which experienced their biggest single day gain in four years on Wednesday.

    TiVo shares closed up 53.3 percent at $10.70 on Wednesday on Nasdaq. The shares were down 30 cents, or 2.8 percent, at $10.55, in after-hours electronic trade.

    (Reporting by Gina Keating; Editing by Andre Grenon, Bernard Orr)
     
  13. Jun 3, 2009 #153 of 2012
    CuriousMark

    CuriousMark Icon

    505
    0
    May 21, 2008
    Correct. But Dish did tell the CAFC that if they did not get a stay they would be severely harmed and the fact that they had a workaround nearly in place was a materiel fact that the CAFC would have wanted to know about in relation to Dish's argument.

    TiVo hinted that this might be necessary before the injunction was originally written. Although I don't think they asked for it specifically at that time, they did warn the judge that this might happen if Dish was granted their wording of the injunction. Dish didn't get their wording but proceeded as if they had.
     
  14. Jun 3, 2009 #154 of 2012
    HDlover

    HDlover Godfather

    310
    0
    Jul 28, 2006
    Seems Tivo is in bed with D* because they are in violation of ReplayTVs patents, now owned by D*
     
  15. Jun 3, 2009 #155 of 2012
    Ohioankev

    Ohioankev Legend

    214
    0
    Jan 19, 2006
    It just shows you that TiVo would of never sued Dish Network if they didn't see their DVRs as a threat.


    Also personally sadly i'll be one of the ones who leaves DISH and just soley uses the internet to watch TV shows , legally of course ;) Dish has been great to me but without the option to timeshift paying $140/month isn't worth it to me because I haven't watched live TV since late 2003 when i got my first DVR from Charter..... to be truthful i really didn't watch "network" or "cable" channels before then just HBO because i've always hated commercials, then i got my first DVR and i've been a TV addict ever since.
     
  16. Jun 3, 2009 #156 of 2012
    HDlover

    HDlover Godfather

    310
    0
    Jul 28, 2006
    Tivo basically has nothing now that E* has the DVRPAL. A law suit is all they have left to cling to to keep them in business. Really seems bogus to me.
     
  17. Jun 3, 2009 #157 of 2012
    jpk

    jpk Mentor

    48
    0
    Nov 5, 2008
    No, Dish and DirecTV are not going to shut down DVRs.

    The remedy is very simple: money.

    All Dish has to do is pay TiVo for its past infringement and agree on payments going forward to license the patent. Dish will pay. Dish will not shut down DVRs.

    How much will Dish pay?

    The amount just got bigger.

    The amount is negotiated between TiVo and Dish, and TiVo's negotiating power just got stronger.

    Dish might have been wise to settle with TiVo before that happened.

    An option now is Dish negotiates licenses for all TiVo patents. That might be wise. If Dish does make this decision, that would also create an incentive for Dish to roll out TiVo-enabled DVRs. That would make me very happy. However this is just one option.

    What is not an option for Dish: further stonewalling, litigation, appeals. My understanding is this latest decision gives TiVo a tool to prevent that: a 30 day time limit counting down to Armageddon for Dish: no DVRs for your customers. That means Dish will pay; is negotiating now, even as we type away, to arrive at the price.
     
  18. Jun 3, 2009 #158 of 2012
    HDlover

    HDlover Godfather

    310
    0
    Jul 28, 2006
    DVRs in general can not last as what advertiser will pay to have their ad skipped. When you watch on the internet, you'll have to watch the ads.
     
  19. Jun 3, 2009 #159 of 2012
    Curtis52

    Curtis52 Hall Of Fame

    1,487
    0
    Oct 13, 2003
    That sounds like irreparable harm to me and great rationale for denying the stay.
     
  20. Jun 3, 2009 #160 of 2012
    HDlover

    HDlover Godfather

    310
    0
    Jul 28, 2006
    I would assume the DVRPAL is not infringing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page