# TIVO wins E* Lawsuit - Potential Impact on ALL DVRs



## HDTVFanAtic (Jul 23, 2005)

http://yahoo.reuters.com/stocks/Quo...6-04-13_22-00-43_WEN4580&symbol=TIVO.O&rpc=44

TiVo wins EchoStar patent lawsuit
Thu Apr 13, 2006 6:00 PM ET
NEW YORK, April 13 (Reuters) - Digital recording technology maker TiVo Inc. on Thursday said it has won a patent lawsuit against satellite television operator EchoStar Communications Corp.

In the case, TiVo charged EchoStar with stealing technology that allows users to record one TV program while watching another via a digital video recorder.


----------



## Darkman (Apr 16, 2002)

just a SideNote:

Tivo's stock at the link above was meanwhile a bit down.. while DISH's - a bit up


----------



## finniganps (Jan 23, 2004)

It should be interesting to see the damages and when E* appeals.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Ok, all you Dish DVR/PVR users - turn in your recorders!


----------



## andyf (Apr 23, 2002)

$73 million ain't too shabby.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060413/tivo_patent.html?.v=2


----------



## juan ellitinez (Jan 31, 2003)

expect a tivo logo on your present e* dvr..(just like when tvguide won on the guide issue)


----------



## dishjim (Oct 21, 2004)

What bothers me is TiVo intends to seek a permanent injunction against EchoStar's DVR products.


----------



## rvd420 (Mar 10, 2003)

This is long from over.

Dish will appeal.

Dish is also countersuing Tvio in Taxarcana, TX.

Another place known for giving plantiffs big awards.

This is going to end with Dish buying all or a large portion of Tivo.

Just like the whole Gemstar deal.


----------



## dishjim (Oct 21, 2004)

A tivo logo would not be bad, but have you read how much x E* owners complain about tivo features?


----------



## shadowplay (Nov 26, 2005)

Darkman said:


> just a SideNote:
> 
> Tivo's stock at the link above was meanwhile a bit down.. while DISH's - a bit up


That was before the decision was announced, it's up $1.93 in after hours trading...


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

Yahoo it's nice to see the big guy lose. Charlie is worth too many BILLIONs it is nice to see a slap on the wrist.


----------



## BillJ (May 5, 2005)

boba said:


> Yahoo it's nice to see the big guy lose. Charlie is worth too many BILLIONs it is nice to see a slap on the wrist.


Speak for yourself. I'm a little guy who owns Echostar stock and leases a new 622 DVR. I could lose both ways. Stock takes a hit and E* raises fees on DVRs. Fight 'em, Charlie!


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

BillJ said:


> Speak for yourself. I'm a little guy who owns Echostar stock and leases a new 622 DVR. I could lose both ways. Stock takes a hit and E* raises fees on DVRs. Fight 'em, Charlie!


Amen on that one brother!!! Charlie and co had a better go to market plan then the Tivo geeks who were apparently stupid enough to leave a prototype behind at E*. I will say though that I am in the camp that believes that E* probably did develop their own technology given the whole 7*** experiment.


----------



## dishjim (Oct 21, 2004)

boba said:


> Yahoo it's nice to see the big guy lose. Charlie is worth too many BILLIONs it is nice to see a slap on the wrist.


Spoken like a true d* customer


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

boba said:


> Yahoo it's nice to see the big guy lose. Charlie is worth too many BILLIONs it is nice to see a slap on the wrist.


So, if he were not worth several billion the case should have gone the other way?


----------



## kmcnamara (Jan 30, 2004)

Richard King said:


> So, if he were not worth several billion the case should have gone the other way?


No, boba just uses every opportunity to bash on E* and Charlie. I think Charlie must have slept with his wife or something.


----------



## hgeyer (Dec 4, 2004)

A few interesting quotes from an article from Wall Street Journal Online:

"TiVo general counsel Matthew Zinn said the verdict won't affect existing users of EchoStar's DVR, but the company will ask the judge to prevent future DVR shipments by the company, though the judge may allow shipments to continue during an appeal."

Read: Better get that 622 ASAP!

"The jury found that satellite-programming provider EchoStar willfully infringed TiVo's patent, which means U.S. District Court Judge David Folsom could order up to triple the jury award in the case."

"The more pressing longer-term question, according to analysts and industry officials, is whether the satellite-television broadcaster will be barred from marketing its existing recorders during the anticipated lengthy appeals process and what modifications might be necessary. Also unclear is the size of EchoStar's financial exposure if it has to begin paying licensing fees on all recording devices marketed to new subscribers."


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I suppose they could be forced to send a new version of firmware that disabled the DVR capability if they lose in the 100% bad way.

This is interesting though... since I had read DirecTV was going to stop selling TiVos and make their own recorders... wouldn't they be next on the TiVo lawsuit train?

And doesn't TiVo owe money retroactively to the inventor of the VCR since they are infringing on that patent to be able to record one program while watching another?

I mean if they are going to be silly about these kinds of lawsuits... why not go full out silly!


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> This is interesting though... since I had read DirecTV was going to stop selling TiVos and make their own recorders... wouldn't they be next on the TiVo lawsuit train?


In the past couple of days DirecTv resigned with Tivo. They may have seen this coming.


----------



## Jason Nipp (Jun 10, 2004)

I see Jeff McClellan at DBSForums posted a link to a statement was issued by E*.

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/04/13/1571951.htm


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

kmcnamara said:


> No, boba just uses every opportunity to bash on E* and Charlie. I think Charlie must have slept with his wife or something.


No I have eaten his wife Canty's cooking.


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

Really truthfully I have spent 21 years helping Charlie make his Billions, I have sold his products since 1985.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Richard King said:


> In the past couple of days DirecTv resigned with Tivo. They may have seen this coming.


Interesting... and if I were a DirecTV basher this could be another sign of Dish fighting "the man" and DirecTV caving.... kinda like with Lifetime.

But I won't say that 

On another front... this now has me thinking about getting a 211 and waiting on DVR for now... because either Dish gets really screwed and has to go from scratch OR lease TiVos and put that into the system... OR Dish buys TiVo and we get new DVR models down the road that way...

Either way, looking more like a better idea not to sink money into a new DVR just yet.


----------



## dave1234 (Oct 9, 2005)

hgeyer said:


> A few interesting quotes from an article from Wall Street Journal Online:
> 
> "TiVo general counsel Matthew Zinn said the verdict won't affect existing users of EchoStar's DVR, but the company will ask the judge to prevent future DVR shipments by the company, though the judge may allow shipments to continue during an appeal."
> 
> ...


The even more pressing long term question is what is TIVO going to do when their patent is likely ruled invalid. Most industry experts are concerned that the TIVO claims are overly broad.

The ruling in this case assumed the patent was 100% valid.

Given the long drawn out process of patent litigation, this won't be resolved for several more years.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

Now I have to ask- Does anyone know if the deal with DirecTV is exclusive or can TIVO license their products to E*? That is an important question as it may be the ultimate solution for E* having any DVR that people will want to use. 
The 73 million is not a slap on the wrist as was stated earlier, as that is just the damage that goes directly to Tivo if they lose the appeal. What is worse, is if E* does lose all multi tuner DVR technology and then lose the customer base. How many of you are so up Charlie's rear you'll stick it out even if all you can use is a 211 type device and a VHS VCR? None? I thought so. E* really needs to work a deal with TIVO and force its subscribers to pay the TIVO fee just like D* does and then the playing field will be equal. Having used both the TIVO and the E* DVR's I can assure everyone that you won't be sorry with the TIVO technology. It just works, is flexible and has 3rd party expansion support.


----------



## spykedvodka (Jan 31, 2006)

Not jumping the gun or anything - but what protection would we have if a few months down the road our DVR's stop working. Let's just say a full injunction was issued? What would dish do to satisfy the customer's that just bought 622's with the lease upgrade fee knowing full well that this was headed to court on this matter when they sold us the item?

The $299.00 lease fee I guess was a collection for their lawyer's retainer. :hurah:


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We can worry about that in 2007 or 2008 after E*'s lawsuit against Tivo and all the appeals in this case. E* DVRs are not going away.


----------



## spykedvodka (Jan 31, 2006)

James Long said:


> We can worry about that in 2007 or 2008 after E*'s lawsuit against Tivo and all the appeals in this case. E* DVRs are not going away.


Ok that was my main concern. You think basically things will be on hold then at least until E*'s lawsuit against TIVO


----------



## Danny R (Jul 5, 2002)

Unfortunately I'm cheering for both teams. I want Tivo to get all the money its due for its patents. Tivo is the better product in my opinion and has always been on shaky financial ground. Having Echostar pay up would undoubtably help them remain afloat as an independent company.

But on the other hand I don't want to pay more for my Echostar DVR either.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

If Tivo's initial patents are overturned this current case becomes moot (since it was decided assuming that Tivo had the initial patents). It would seem to turn DVRs into a patent free landscape except for unique features that were developed separately.


----------



## HDTVFanAtic (Jul 23, 2005)

Darkman said:



> just a SideNote:
> 
> Tivo's stock at the link above was meanwhile a bit down.. while DISH's - a bit up


You clearly didn't see the afterhours action. The news did not hit until 6PM.


----------



## toad57 (Apr 23, 2002)

spykedvodka said:


> ...What would dish do to satisfy the customer's that just bought 622's with the lease upgrade fee knowing full well that this was headed to court on this matter when they sold us the item?


Heck, I know that answer: Coupons for 3 months of free HBO.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

From SkyReport.com:



> TiVo Wins Jury Decision in Lawsuit Against DISH
> 
> *"Dish Network subscribers can continue to use their DVRs.
> TiVo dropped their claim that EchoStar's DISHplayer 7200
> ...


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

dishjim said:


> A tivo logo would not be bad, but have you read how much x E* owners complain about tivo features?


Not all of us. The only reason I left E* for D* was really the HD-Tivo.


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

What echostar isn't saying, is that once the first judgement falls against them, it's much harder to get it reversed. Not impossible--certainly happens--but it's a bit of an uphill battle now.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

The US Patent Office can't find their ass with both hands and a roadmap regarding computer technology. The real question is WHEN will that patent be ruled invalid.

All Tivo did was combine existing standard off the shelf pieces and put their fancy software interface on it. Nothing more, nothing less. Harddrive here, MPEG2 encoder here (which, btw, puts the time mark stamps), MPEG2 decoder, A/D and D/A audio/video chips to standard video inputs/ outputs / TV tuner.

E* and D* - delete the MPEG2 encoder (it's being done at their uplink centers). Cable companies - they ARE TiVo's w/o their interface.


----------



## AdamGott (Nov 30, 2005)

scooper said:


> The US Patent Office can't find their ass with both hands and a roadmap regarding computer technology. The real question is WHEN will that patent be ruled invalid.


No poop (insert your other favorite expletive here if desired)!

Computer patents these days are a joke and I would love to read Tivo's.

Lots of them that have been hitting court lately are a total joke.

My guess is that the patent reads something close to this and is in no way more technical than this example:

'A device that can be used to digitally record a tv show and watch another at the same time.'


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

Looks like Charlie gambled and lost. DishTivo's will be available soon.


----------



## cap (Mar 30, 2004)

Curtis0620 said:


> Looks like Charlie gambled and lost. DishTivo's will be available soon.


Sign me up!!!


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Between now and then, both E* and Tivo may resolve their issues and will agree to a solution that will benefit everyone including a new Tivo fee for E* DVR users (which ain't no benefit).


----------



## Laverne (Feb 17, 2005)

rvd420 said:


> ...
> 
> Dish is also countersuing Tvio in Taxarcana, TX.
> 
> ....


Not that it matters just a _whole_ whole lot, but it's "Texarkana". 
Named for *TEX*as, *ARK*ansas, and Louisi*ANA*.

I guess actually it might matter to those who might want to do a search.


----------



## wilme2 (Jul 14, 2005)

Darkman said:


> just a SideNote:
> 
> Tivo's stock at the link above was meanwhile a bit down.. while DISH's - a bit up


Dang, I wanted to see Dish's stock take a brief hit.

_(Cause I want to buy some shares!)_


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

rvd420 said:


> Dish is also countersuing Tvio in Taxarcana, TX.





Laverne said:


> Not that it matters just a _whole_ whole lot, but it's "Texarkana".
> Named for *TEX*as, *ARK*ansas, and Louisi*ANA*.
> 
> I guess actually it might matter to those who might want to do a search.


Well, ever being the Enigma sleuth, I surmised that "Taxarcana" had a more sinister meaning, perhaps derived from the words 'tax' and 'arcane', but in reality, it's probably just another stoopid speeling misteak.

Just wait 'til those blood-thirsty TiVo lawyers spot the poster's blatant misspelling of their principal's copyrighted and trademarked name.


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. --(Business Wire)-- April 13, 2006 -- EchoStar has issued the following statement regarding the verdict in the TiVo Inc. v. EchoStar Communications Corp. lawsuit: "This is the first step in a very long process and we are confident we will ultimately prevail. Among other things, we believe the patent - as interpreted in this case - is overly broad given the technology in existence when TiVo filed its patent. We believe the decision will be reversed either through post-trial motions or on appeal. Additionally, the Patent Office is in the process of re-examining TiVo's patent, having determined there is a substantial question concerning the validity of the patent. 



DISH Network subscribers can continue to use the receivers in their homes, including their DVRs. Furthermore, TiVo dropped their claim that EchoStar's Dishplayer 7200 DVR infringes their patent. 

EchoStar looks forward to trial of its DVR patent case against TiVo in February 2007."


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

As previously stated, it is now an uphill battle for E* to overturn this ruling. The downside is that not only will E* likely have to pay more for DVR service but cable DVR users and possibly even D* DVR users will pay more too. The upside of this is that since overturning this ruling is an uphill battle, I expect E* will come to some kind of settlement with TIVO to market E* by TIVO DVR's and TIVO software will be downloaded to current E* DVR's, kind of like the TV Guide deal of a couple of years ago. Cable company's will also likely do deals with TIVO too. If I am not mistaken, the new D* contract extension with TIVO only effects current D*TIVO subs and does not mean D* will start producing TIVO enhanced DVR's again and includes a provision that TIVO will not sue D*. This may mean that in the future the only independent program provider with a DVR that is NOT TIVO enhanced will be D*.


----------



## UTFAN (Nov 12, 2005)

HDTVFanAtic said:


> http://yahoo.reuters.com/stocks/Quo...6-04-13_22-00-43_WEN4580&symbol=TIVO.O&rpc=44
> 
> TiVo wins EchoStar patent lawsuit
> Thu Apr 13, 2006 6:00 PM ET
> ...


Case is on appeal, TiVO's spreadsheet remains decididly in the red this morning, the DVR's on all of our receivers are working just fine and the sun rose in the east.

Whoop dee doo!:nono2:


----------



## UTFAN (Nov 12, 2005)

cap said:


> Sign me up!!!


On second thought, hold your breath.:lol: :grin: :hurah:


----------



## the_bear (Oct 18, 2004)

AdamGott said:


> ...Computer patents these days are a joke and I would love to read Tivo's....
> My guess is that the patent reads something close to this and is in no way more technical than this example:
> 
> 'A device that can be used to digitally record a tv show and watch another at the same time.'


You have summed-up the patent well, here is the full thing.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6233389.pdf

I noticed Dish has changed their defense strategy from showing their DVR is significantly different from TiVo to attempting to invalidate the TiVo patent. This strategy change was suggested by several DBSTalk posts. I hope this correlation means we will see the end of those don't post advice to the Dish legal team insulting comments.

There is a concern there will be a temporary time period where E DVRs are not for sale. I have already been asked, "Should I go out and buy a 622 while they are still on the market?"


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Richard King said:


> So, if he were not worth several billion the case should have gone the other way?


Quite possibly. Furthermore, it is likely that given what the E* legal team knows now of the TiVo case, they will likely roll over them in appeal and clean TiVo's clock in the countersuit.

Modern lawsuits have become a dark art of choosing venues and using the opinions of "pundits" as opposed to the experience of those directly involved. It is the same force that drives the news media. Why ask an Afghan in Afghanistan what is going on there when you can contract with an academic specializing in Afghan Studies at a respected American university and call them your "Exclusive Middle East consultant"?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=pundit


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Chris Freeland said:


> The downside is that not only will E* likely have to pay more for DVR service but cable DVR users and possibly even D* DVR users will pay more too.


I had predicted that there would be some "friend of the court" stuff show up, but it didn't. I now surmise that kind of support would have made it look like more of a "we too are using the technology without licensing and believe that E* isn't infringing" thing.

I still think E* could have played the failure to protect IP card more effectively.

The D* <-> TiVo non-litigation agreement does cast kind of a funny hue on the whole thing. I wonder if NDS is going to be held harmless by this agreement.


----------



## larrystotler (Jun 6, 2004)

This is as bad as the RIM Blackberry case. All 5 of NTP's patents were invalidated, but RIM still settled. Software patents, process patents, and all that crap are a joke. Talk about stifling innovation. The reason TiVo is losing money is because they charge too much for the service. If they would have reduced the price to about $5-7 per month, they would have a huge installed base and would be making money. Their D* deal shows that people would pay $5-7 per month for the service(even though it is only 14 days vs 39). They be idiots.


----------



## JosephF (Apr 23, 2002)

> What echostar isn't saying, is that once the first judgement falls against them, it's much harder to get it reversed. Not impossible--certainly happens--but it's a bit of an uphill battle now.


While this may be true in normal cases, it is far from the truth when it comes to patent cases. Roughly 40% of all patent cases are overturned on appeal, with the rate being higher on cases in Marshall.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

You mean 60% aren't overturned. Looks like Charlie is wasting his money that he will ultimately be paying TiVo.


----------



## Kagato (Jul 1, 2002)

larrystotler said:


> This is as bad as the RIM Blackberry case. All 5 of NTP's patents were invalidated, but RIM still settled. Software patents, process patents, and all that crap are a joke. Talk about stifling innovation. The reason TiVo is losing money is because they charge too much for the service. If they would have reduced the price to about $5-7 per month, they would have a huge installed base and would be making money. Their D* deal shows that people would pay $5-7 per month for the service(even though it is only 14 days vs 39). They be idiots.


Tivo charges more for stand alone units. They have to pay for national dial in access for guide data. Tivo charges about the same as Dish does for it's DirecTivo. (Actually they pay less than we do at Dish if they have more than one DVR, as the DVR fee is per account, not per DVR.) For that fee it provides software that is both superior in terms of look and feel, but is much more stable than the 500/600/700/900 series DVRs.

When I had Tivo I didn't have recurring issues of timmers not firing, Zero Seccond Records, and a list of other issues that every 721/921/924 ower has felt. I would say the best thing that could happen to me as a Dish owner is for them to be forced to use Tivo. At least then my recordings would happen on time, and the local channel mapping would have correct data.

To comment on the thread title, this does not effect DVRs sold by Microsoft, Replay and DirecTV. Those companies have cross license agreements.

- Jaded 921/721 DVR owner


----------



## socceteer (Apr 22, 2005)

juan ellitinez said:


> expect a tivo logo on your present e* dvr..(just like when tvguide won on the guide issue)


That would be great, hopefully then Dish can add all of the tivo software. Those of us who own Tivo boxes know what I am talking about...Very stable. Even on the HD dual tuner boxes.


----------



## UTFAN (Nov 12, 2005)

Curtis0620 said:


> You mean 60% aren't overturned. Looks like Charlie is wasting his money that he will ultimately be paying TiVo.


Looks like I'm the only here that didn't go to law school, so I'll just lay out what I know. But I do know a tad about the business world and litigation.

Losing a lawsuit is no big deal. It's the first set of downs of the first quarter.

Anyone who underestimates the legal savvy of Echostar attorneys, the business savvy of Mr. Ergen, or his just plain horse smarts, does so foolishly.

All this speculation is just that, speculation.

Like I posted earlier, our 921, 721 and 508 DVR units are working just fine this morning, (Well, the 921 as good as can be expected) and I expect our new 622 will work just fine as well.

The DVR police didn't come knocking on my door this morning and I believe Echostar and its 20-thousand employees were all at work today as well. I'm guessing they're already working on the next Charlie Chat!

All over America today, people bought or had installed, DISH Network systems, many with DVR's.

Perhaps a few years in the future this will all be resolved. The only real question is if TiVO can survive that long. I could care less either way.

Echostar most assuredly will survive.

I'll turn this back over to you Harvard Law Review experts now.


----------



## Curtis0620 (Apr 22, 2002)

Of course Echostar will survive, the question is do they want to have a DVR? If so, they must pay TiVo.


----------



## Fifty Caliber (Jan 4, 2006)

I hope Tivo folds and gets bought out by E*. They didn't invent the concept of storing video on a hard drive, anymore than Radio Shack "invented" Family Radio Service.


----------



## chrisk (Jun 6, 2004)

Agree with E*, this is far from over. It may end up as a battle fo the "deep pockets". E* posted something $1.5B profit in 2005, Tivo has yet to turn a profit. Hmmm, wonder who might win?


----------



## audiomaster (Jun 24, 2004)

Well Charlie just shipped me the latest prototype of the super secret 007 receiver. No hard drive. 500 gig solid state memory chips. 6 tuners (two off air, one does cable)) built in AM,FM and HD DVD player (HD and Blu Ray) 4 zone outputs for 4 rooms with simultaneous playback of separate programs. 3 month guide info. IR and RF separate control for all zones. The built-in coffee maker and popcorn machine do make the thing a little large but hey.. And he said he wants us to have one so bad he is paying us to let him install one!

Wife.... "Wake up honey, your having that dream again"!:zzz:


----------



## Kagato (Jul 1, 2002)

Tivo has the upper hand now. Theres no way around it. In particular because the jury said the infringement was willful. 

That being said E*'s goose isn't going to be cooked unless Tivo is granted a perminate injunction. Tivo will be asking for that next week. If they are granted it E* will be forced to take a hard look at a settlement right away. And even if they don't get the injunction they still need to take a hard look at what Tivo is offering in the long term.

As for people talking about Tivo surviving, you need to do some research. The company has very little debt. It's pretty much funded by equity capital. Meaning they issued stock for cash. Most of it during a time when the stock was selling for a lot. They are far from going under. Frankly some of the stuff posting in this thread is embarassing. The Tivo folks are actually quoting from it over on the Tivo Community forums pointing out all the factual errors.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

larrystotler said:


> Software patents, process patents, and all that crap are a joke. Talk about stifling innovation.


Looking at the TiVo patent, it is more schematic that descriptive. I can't imagine anyone using a "media switch" in a digital scheme. All of this talk of interleaving audio and video simply doesn't apply if you don't split them in the first place.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Kagato said:


> It's pretty much funded by equity capital. Meaning they issued stock for cash.


As such, there is nothing to back up the company in the event of a stock price dive, right? Their revenues are coming from those who lease boxes under the new lease plan or weren't shrewd (or confident) enough to buy lifetime subscriptions. Lifetime subscriptions are certainly not something that you can take to a financial institution as an indication of future revenue.

Unless they can make an example of E*, the value of their asset (the patent portfolio) may be in serious doubt.

What then makes TiVo attractive to (wouldbe) capitalists?


----------



## oldave (Dec 22, 2003)

Aww, c'mon, gang... even if an injunction is issued, E* will immediately file an appeal in the next higher court, and the injunction would likely be stayed pending the outcome of that appeal.

This whole "the sky is falling" bit gets old. Nothing will change for years, by which time the New, Improved Next Great Thing (tm) will be out there, and this whole thing will be moot.


----------



## TomH (Jun 11, 2005)

Curtis0620 said:


> Looks like Charlie gambled and lost. DishTivo's will be available soon.


As long as they don't have that awful TiVo user interface.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

Capmeister said:


> What echostar isn't saying, is that once the first judgement falls against them, it's much harder to get it reversed. Not impossible--certainly happens--but it's a bit of an uphill battle now.


It's been reported that 40% of the patent suit rulings in this jurisdiction are overturned on appeal, those are pretty good odds as far as court cases go.


----------



## bobukcat (Dec 20, 2005)

Curtis0620 said:


> Looks like Charlie gambled and lost. DishTivo's will be available soon.


To quote Tom & Jerry - "DOOOONNN'T YOOOUUU BEELIEVE IT!!! 

This thing is far from over, it's the first shot in a war, not a declaration of the overall winners and losers.


----------



## manicd (Jan 30, 2003)

I certainly wouldn't want to have anything that is tivo. tivo is garbage. I never say I tivo something. I say I disked it.

I hope tivo loses everything and goes belly up. And no, I don't work for Dish or own any Dish stock, nor am I a relative.

Dish is better than tivo and always will be.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Okay lets here it, why is the best thing since sliced bread garbage in your humble opinion?

It is at this time I would like to officially congratulate TiVo Inc, the company that created the best DVR known to man on a glorious victory over Chuckie. :goodjob: 

TiVo 1, Dish Notwork 0, see ya in appeals


----------



## manicd (Jan 30, 2003)

The marketplace has already decided the quality of tivo as being overpriced and poor quality. If it was such a great product people everywhere would have snatched them up like hotcakes. And tivo would be a multi-billion dollar company.


But since enough people didn't like tivo, tivo is not such a company.

Let's face it. DVRs are nothing more than a glorified VHS player. The broadcast industry was able to pause and delay live TV way before tivo came along. The broadcast industry needs to sue tivo for stealing their concepts and ideas.


And if you look at its this way:

People say Dish DVRs are poorly designed.
tivo says Dish stole from them.
tivo also must be poorly designed.


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Curtis0620 said:


> Of course Echostar will survive, the question is do they want to have a DVR? If so, they must pay TiVo.


TIVO will either go broke or be bought by someone.


----------



## larrystotler (Jun 6, 2004)

harsh said:


> Looking at the TiVo patent, it is more schematic that descriptive. I can't imagine anyone using a "media switch" in a digital scheme. All of this talk of interleaving audio and video simply doesn't apply if you don't split them in the first place.


The Problem is that patents stiffle innovation and competetion for no reason. Just imagine if K-Mart had filed for and received a patent for the Department Store. They could then have sued Wal-Mart for violating their patent and then charged Wal-Mart a royalty for every store that they opened. There are so many patents that are just BS that they should just get rid of that system as it stands now. A software program or process doesn't require the billions of $$ in research that Drug Companies and other industries spend. That's what a Copyright is for, and even then that system is abused. Thank Congress and the deep pockets of Big Business for bad laws like the DMCA and stuff like that. Not only that, but eventually they will impose restrictions on how long you can keep the recorded program and that you won't be able to skip comercials or anything else that we are used to doing now. That's not progress or allowing us our fair use rights to do what we wish according to the Fair Use laws.


----------



## larrystotler (Jun 6, 2004)

Kagato said:


> Tivo charges more for stand alone units. They have to pay for national dial in access for guide data. Tivo charges about the same as Dish does for it's DirecTivo.


Yeah, that's how TiVo screwed themselves. People prefered buying the D* versions because they were less expensive. TiVo gets a whole dollar and change from D* for each account. That's much less than the $12.99 that an SA costs, and the PQ of an SA is not as good since the D*TiVo just records the incoming stream. and forget about an SA/HD box. There isn't one yet. If TiVo had a $5 fee for service with only a 14 day guide and had the 39 day one as an option, they would have been much more successful.



Kagato said:


> I would say the best thing that could happen to me as a Dish owner is for them to be forced to use Tivo. At least then my recordings would happen on time, and the local channel mapping would have correct data.


And, that is when I will cancel my service. I have never liked the TiVos. The newer E* boxes are much faster and, IMHO, easier to use than a D* TiVo. They don't have all the extra features of the TiVo, but they work well for the rest of us. And the newer ones are a lot more stable. The TiVos aren't perfect either. Check out any TiVo board and you wll see some issues. Not as many as E*'s maybe, but when people are getting them for free, they tolerate more. My next DVR will be a PC running MythTV anyway, which is free. That's also like comparing Linux/Unix to Windows. Linux/Unix is harder to learn(except maybe for thr MAC version, OS X), but it is more secure and crashes a whole lot less, yet people expect Windows to come on their PC, and then complain about how crappy it is. You know how many viruses I have had? None. Never bought an AntiVirus, spyware, adware program. No need to. Maybe eventually, but not for a good while.



Kagato said:


> To comment on the thread title, this does not effect DVRs sold by Microsoft, Replay and DirecTV. Those companies have cross license agreements.


Yes, but TiVo is actually looking to use it for leverage against anyone that doesn't have a comtract with thm. E* is only the tip of the iceburg, and in the long run, the ones that will suffer is us, the consumer, because if TiVo is forced on the E* boxes, we get to pay for the costs to implement the system. That's a lose/lose situation no matter how you look at it.


----------



## SaltiDawg (Aug 30, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> ...
> It is at this time I would like to officially congratulate TiVo Inc, the company that created the best DVR known to man on a glorious victory over Chuckie. :goodjob:
> ...


Your sig says:

Time Warner Cable Subscriber as of 2/06
Dish Network Subscriber from 12/98 to 2/04, DirecTV Subscriber from 2/04 to 2/06
XM Subscriber as of 8/03, Sirius Subscriber as of 10/04

Why do post thousands of your more than seven thousand posts on a "General Dish Network Discussion" Forum. Certinaly you are not contributing any added value to the discussion and indeed are a distraction.

But I guess that was your objective.

Can we spell "Trolling?" :nono2:


----------



## Marriner (Jan 23, 2006)

... and the lawyers get richer...


----------



## hankmack (Feb 8, 2006)

The April 17 [rint issue of Barrons on page 33 by Tiernan Ray has an interesting article about TIVO and selling TIVO stock after Thursday gain "may be the best exit for investors." His last sentence says, "What lies ahead are many years of knocking on cable operators' doors, a long, long story with no fast forward button in sight."

Now maybe a way out for TIVO would be for DTV to buy TIVO. Then DTV would have leverage over E* IF the patents are valid.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I haven't read the details, but I have a hard time believing TiVo could have innovated much of anything, considering that it is a hard drive, MPEG2 decoder/encoder, standard video/audio outputs, and remote control.... all technology that predates TiVo by many years.

I *could* see if they were trying to sue EchoStar with copyright violations in the software, but that doesn't appear to be what this is about.

Also worth considering that TiVos can be used with anyone, but a Dish DVR can only be used with Dish Network... so I can't see where Dish would be stepping on any TiVo toes in that arena... especially I've seen people post that they do use TiVo boxes in conjunction with Dish Network standard receivers.

This sounds like the dying gasp of a company (TiVo) who is about to go under unless they can litigate themselves out of the red.


----------



## Fifty Caliber (Jan 4, 2006)

HDMe said:


> I haven't read the details, but I have a hard time believing TiVo could have innovated much of anything, considering that it is a hard drive, MPEG2 decoder/encoder, standard video/audio outputs, and remote control.... all technology that predates TiVo by many years.
> 
> This sounds like the dying gasp of a company (TiVo) who is about to go under unless they can litigate themselves out of the red.


Maybe Al Gore will use this as a precident for his lawsuit reclaiming all the residuals for inventing the internet.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

SaltiDawg said:


> Your sig says:
> 
> Time Warner Cable Subscriber as of 2/06
> Dish Network Subscriber from 12/98 to 2/04, DirecTV Subscriber from 2/04 to 2/06
> ...


:lol: :lol: :lol: T-R-O-L-L  I can spell.

Former admin, been here since August 2001, less two months after it's birth. Yep I'm trolling. :lol:

This thread is about TiVo and my 'objective' is that I'm voicing my full support for them. I guess since I'm not basically saying 'TiVo is dead' that's a troll post I take it, since I'm not concurring with the norm. Right?

Honestly all I do is click on 'View New Posts'. I don't pay much attention which forum topics that interest me are it. Perhaps thousands of my posts are made in the Dish forum, because I was a subscriber to their service for over 5 years, as you quoted, could that explain it?



> Let's face it. DVRs are nothing more than a glorified VHS player.


No you're confusing real DVRs with Dish's poor excuse for one when they came out with the 501 and such. It more then recording things like a VCR, it's all name based recordings. I can record whatever I want and ignore the schedule. I don't have to worry about extended episodes, new times, new days, special airings, repeats. My DVR takes care of that for me. If I still had the ole 508 POS, I would have missed the final part of the season finale of The Shield, would have missed a special War At Home last month and just this past week would have missed the special showing of Conviction this past Tuesday night. No VCR can do that, and most of the Dish DVRs can't do it that reliability, if you think that's the same as a VCR so be it. I've been using real DVRs for over two years now with the DirecTiVo and now my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD and neither of them come close to the non-reliability of the 501 and two 508s I owned



> But since enough people didn't like tivo, tivo is not such a company.


Because most people don't know much about TiVo. TiVo has done a piss poor lousy job at appealing to the masses, they expect electronics geeks who do more research then Sunday circulars and ads on TV to buy them and sell the idea off on friends.



> The marketplace has already decided the quality of tivo as being overpriced and poor quality. If it was such a great product people everywhere would have snatched them up like hotcakes. And tivo would be a multi-billion dollar company.


No, the market place has decided they don't want an extra component, they want an integrated DVR with their satellite receiver or digital cable box. TiVo should have did what they did with DirecTV with not only Comcast, but Cox and Time Warner as well. All three of those cable cos already partnered up for inDemand, don't see why they couldn't come together again with TiVo and form another partnership.



> People say Dish DVRs are poorly designed.
> tivo says Dish stole from them.
> tivo also must be poorly designed.


Cute. Very Cute. You still haven't said why or how TiVos are poor quality?

I really miss the nice layout of TiVo, but the Explorer 8300 is a suitable replacement, since there will never been an MPEG4 HD TiVo, I don't see the sense of paying $700 for the current HD TiVo when it will be outdated soon and my Explorer 8300HD was completely free upfront. Even though I no longer have a TiVo, I support 110% THE company that pioneered, and perfected digital video recording.

I can't wait to see what Cisco has in store for Scientific Atlanta, maybe they can come up with home networking multimedia features that blow TiVos away, maybe not.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

HDMe said:


> I haven't read the details, but I have a hard time believing TiVo could have innovated much of anything, considering that it is a hard drive, MPEG2 decoder/encoder, standard video/audio outputs, and remote control.... all technology that predates TiVo by many years.
> 
> I *could* see if they were trying to sue EchoStar with copyright violations in the software, but that doesn't appear to be what this is about.


You hit my feelings exactly. Tivo claims that the violation is in the fact that they can record one program while watching another program. That is simply a feature of the capabilities a hard drive. As I type this I am recording music on the same hard drive. I am doing the same thing that they sued Dish over. Sure, there are differences, but the function is OBVIOUS and should not be patented. If they could somehow prove that Dish stole specific lines of code they might have a leg to stand on, but not with an obvious use like this. I have a feeling that this will be reversed in appeal.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Richard King said:


> You hit my feelings exactly. Tivo claims that the violation is in the fact that they can record one program while watching another program. That is simply a feature of the capabilities a hard drive. As I type this I am recording music on the same hard drive. I am doing the same thing that they sued Dish over. Sure, there are differences, but the function is OBVIOUS and should not be patented. If they could somehow prove that Dish stole specific lines of code they might have a leg to stand on, but not with an obvious use like this. I have a feeling that this will be reversed in appeal.


Yeah... I was also thinking earlier about some TVs I have seen that have these features available built-in or as an add-on. I know Toshiba, for instance, makes a DVR for use with their TVs... so if you have cable service and use the cablecard plugin, you can use their external DVR to record/timeshift programs... and the TVs come with dual-digital-OTA tuners so you could also record and/or watch an OTA digital program at the same time!

I suspect TiVo isn't suing everybody using this concept.

And, like you said, that doesn't even take into account all the multitasking with computers. Those folks who have those modified 6000s for instance that allow them to PVR with their computers... should fall into the same TiVo lawsuit category if they had a leg to stand on.


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

socceteer said:


> That would be great, hopefully then Dish can add all of the tivo software. Those of us who own Tivo boxes know what I am talking about...Very stable. Even on the HD dual tuner boxes.


Well, I own one (the HR10-250), and 'stable' is not quite what I'd call it. I think 'POS' is more reasonable. Check out the HR10 thread on tivocommunity. I've been through three of them. Many people have had hardware problems, some fixed by D*, some not. It hasn't had a software upgrade in a year, it's so sloooow as to be almost unusable, and it tends to reboot right in the middle of recording. Hard drive failures are common, too.

I'm actually considering dumping D* and moving to E* so I can get a 622!


----------



## Red Dwarf (Aug 25, 2002)

I did the same thing. But it wasn't because of the HR10-250. It's because of the lack of MPEG 4 PVR , less HD programming and HD lite. Dish quality overall is superior. That plus the new DirecTv PVRs are dropping the very useful 30 second skip feature.


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

DonLandis said:


> Now I have to ask- Does anyone know if the deal with DirecTV is exclusive or can TIVO license their products to E*? That is an important question as it may be the ultimate solution for E* having any DVR that people will want to use.
> The 73 million is not a slap on the wrist as was stated earlier, as that is just the damage that goes directly to Tivo if they lose the appeal. What is worse, is if E* does lose all multi tuner DVR technology and then lose the customer base. How many of you are so up Charlie's rear you'll stick it out even if all you can use is a 211 type device and a VHS VCR? None? I thought so. E* really needs to work a deal with TIVO and force its subscribers to pay the TIVO fee just like D* does and then the playing field will be equal. Having used both the TIVO and the E* DVR's I can assure everyone that you won't be sorry with the TIVO technology. It just works, is flexible and has 3rd party expansion support.


Tivo is not interested in shutting E* down. They simply want (need) the cash. Odds are this will not hold up on appeal anyway. Even worst case, the financial impact of this award plus future royalties would not materially impact E* to any significant degree.

Also, this was never about wanting E* to fully license Tivo software. It was about paying royalties for the patents (much lower that the $12 a mos or whatever the full software is now).

Finally, there are many former Tivo users like myself who would strongly disagree with your assertion that we would all be better off with the Tivo interface. I used Tivo for several years, and would not want to go back after having the 942.

As far as the Direct-Tivo deal, the only deal they currently have is to continue providing support for the installed base of D* Tivos. Tivo has been kicked to the curb for all future D* DVRs. And no, there is noone with an exclusive agreement with Tivo.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

manicd said:


> f it was such a great product people everywhere would have snatched them up like hotcakes. And tivo would be a multi-billion dollar company.


The TiVo product may not be the best implementation, but it is an exceedingly important product. DVRs will replace VCRs and we all know how many VCRs there are out there. You may or may not remember how VCR's were once known collectively as "Betamax".


> But since enough people didn't like tivo, tivo is not such a company.


People didn't buy TiVos for a couple of important reasons:

1. When they became the verb, much of the content was crappy digital cable and the poor PQ reproduction of the TiVo made it all the more crappy.
2. TiVo service is too damned expensive.


> Let's face it. DVRs are nothing more than a glorified VHS player.


I beg to differ. DVRs are the next logica step for which the technology has only recently become affordable.


> The broadcast industry was able to pause and delay live TV way before tivo came along. The broadcast industry needs to sue tivo for stealing their concepts and ideas.


Tape delay has nothing to do with what makes DVRs attractive. The attraction is being able to record weeks of content without intervention. The attraction is being able to start watching a "live" program twenty minutes in and ending at the same time that everyone else sees the end without having to suffer the four minute commercial breaks every eight minutes.

If TiVo suffers or dies, it will because they didn't actively protect their IP on a regular basis. Having gone through two complete product cycles with their own product, they've just now managed to complete their first infringement lawsuit. What's wrong with this picture?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Richard King said:


> If they could somehow prove that Dish stole specific lines of code they might have a leg to stand on, but not with an obvious use like this.


That would be a copyright case, not a patent case.


----------



## TomH (Jun 11, 2005)

manicd said:


> I never say I tivo something. I say I disked it.


I say "I recorded it".

I agree though. TiVo is just a brand name who made their name known first and patented the obvious next evolutionary step in recording TV.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

TomH said:


> I say "I recorded it".
> 
> I agree though. TiVo is just a brand name who made their name known first and patented the obvious next evolutionary step in recording TV.


And they weren't really the first to do so... Long ago I was able to feed TV content to my computer and record it with a video capture card.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

harsh said:


> You may or may not remember how VCR's were once known collectively as "Betamax".


Not to be off-topic... but when was this?

I remember the VHS and the Betamax... and I remember all of them being called VCRs... and of course I remember that VHS won the war, even though in many ways it was an inferior implementation.

But I never remember people calling them generically "Betamax" unless they actually were Betamax VCRs.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> DVRs will replace VCRs and we all know how many VCRs there are out there.


DVRs replaced VCRs in this house as of Spring 2002. VCRs are useless. At one time there were two VCRs hooked up and three spares around here. I threw all my VCRs out along with all my VHS tapes. Last VCR went down by the road last month when I finally got rid of my SVHS VCR that use used only as an accurate clock for the past few years, since the cable box has a clock display on the front I ditched it.

When I had TiVo I used to say 'I TiVo'd that', but out of respect for the company I don't say that any more, now I say 'I DVR'd that'. Kleenex, Windex, Band Aid, Thermos I could careless about generic references. But when it comes to technology, there is only one TiVo and only one iPod. Cheap imitations are just that.

TiVo, the only DVR mentioned by name on many TV shows including, The Simpson's, South Park, CSI and Sex & The City.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Steve Mehs said:


> TiVo, the only DVR mentioned by name on many TV shows including, The Simpson's, South Park, CSI and Sex & The City.


There was a Family Guy episode sometime during the 2nd season (original run from before it was cancelled and came back) where a guy in a TV store was demoing a TiVo for the Griffin family.

Also a Robot Chicken episode last year where Ashton Kutcher became addicted to it and stopped leaving the house or eating!


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

I missed that.  I got into Family Guy late last season, been trying to catch the repeats on Cartoon Network on Adult Swim when I get home from work. I guess I should just start DVRing them


----------



## JohnL (Apr 1, 2002)

Fifty Caliber said:


> Maybe Al Gore will use this as a precident for his lawsuit reclaiming all the residuals for inventing the internet.


Fifty,

Al Gore "NEVER" said he invented the internet. That quote is repeating ad nausem on Network TV, it was completely taken out of context.

What Al Gore said was, "I was one of the original supporters and helped setup up Arpanet, and without Apranet there would have been no internet"

Talk about being misquoted, you don't have to believe me, do your own research and see for yourself.

You can listen the talking heads all day, but many of them have their own axe to grind and do have reasons to twist something said into something competely different.

Instead of parroting something you CAN'T verify doesn't make it true.

John


----------



## Chris Walker (May 19, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> Okay lets here it, why is the best thing since sliced bread garbage in your humble opinion?
> 
> It is at this time I would like to officially congratulate TiVo Inc, the company that created the best DVR known to man on a glorious victory over Chuckie. :goodjob:
> 
> TiVo 1, Dish Notwork 0, see ya in appeals


People like Steve and Curtis0620 are the reason I don't come to dbstalk hardly any, the trolling here is out of hand. A couple people who hate Echostar ruin any thread that has nothing to do with their service. These two and a couple others need to be given a vacation from this place.


----------



## Chris Walker (May 19, 2004)

Paul Secic said:


> TIVO will either go broke or be bought by someone.


Correct. However, the most likely scenario is they lose in appeals against Charlie's deep pockets. They don't have the $ to fight this and survive at the same time.


----------



## Chris Walker (May 19, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol: T-R-O-L-L  I can spell.
> 
> Former admin, been here since August 2001, less two months after it's birth. Yep I'm trolling. :lol:.


"Dish Notwork"  There's a reason you're no longer an admin here, please take your crap to the cable forum. For the record, a lot of people despise the Tivo interface and would much prefer a cable or Dish DVR to a Tivo.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

It was a joke dude, lighten up, I meant nothing other then congratulating TiVo. What ever hidden agenda you think I have is in your mind, not mine.

BTW - I relinquished my being a moderator due to my lack of free time needed to dedicate to this site.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Steve Mehs said:


> I can't wait to see what Cisco has in store for Scientific Atlanta, maybe they can come up with home networking multimedia features that blow TiVos away, maybe not.


Unless things have changed in the last 3 years, Cisco knows how to pass packets around very very very fast. In terms of providing fully integrated solutions with a high level of usability in mind. That is not their strong suit.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Well this is the problem with patents... They have become a business model. Because of lawsuits similar to this one, companies focus on building large Patent portfolios and use it as a competitive club. 

Having read a few patents some years back they were so broad and vague that the could be interperted a number of ways and it was down by design. A previous company that I worked for went through a Patent explosion program designed to add as many patents as possible for the sole purpose to be used both defensively and offensively... 

I am sure this was not what the purpose of patents were and it this is what is is becoming. 

1) A revenue generating mechanism, "Remember the JPEG patent" and who holds that one?

2) A save my company from dying mechanism. (This one would fall into this catagory).

3) A club to stopped my competition or to be used when my competition out performs me or trys to club me with their patent portfolio.

Well i hope that if the patent is as broad as it sounds, I hope it gets overturned. If not, Dish is not the only ones that will feel the pain. 

Anyone have a link to the list of patents? Might be some interesting reading.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Ron Barry said:


> Having read a few patents some years back they were so broad and vague that the could be interperted a number of ways and it was down by design. A previous company that I worked for went through a Patent explosion program designed to add as many patents as possible for the sole purpose to be used both defensively and offensively...


I hear you. I worked for a similar company, and I remember the memos that were regularly sent around to remind everyone to document everything and to let the right people know if you ever did anything that might be patentable so they could go for it.

I also remember tallies that were emailed around to announce how many patents had been applied for by department and company-wide... like it was another quantity over quality contest!


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

TiVo issued the following statement in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas:



> "TiVo is pleased that the jury found the company's time warping patent is valid and
> that EchoStar has been infringing on our intellectual property. TiVo is particularly
> gratified that the jury found that EchoStar willfully infringed on our patent and the
> consequences their actions had on our overall business.
> ...


EchoStar issued this statement regarding the verdict:



> "This is the first step in a very long process and we are confident we will
> ultimately prevail. Among other things, we believe the patent - as interpreted
> in this case - is overly broad given the technology in existence when TiVo filed
> its patent. We believe the decision will be reversed either through post-trial
> ...


www.SkyRetailer.com - used with permission


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

JohnL said:


> Al Gore "NEVER" said he invented the internet. That quote is repeating ad nausem on Network TV, it was completely taken out of context.
> 
> What Al Gore said was, "I was one of the original supporters and helped setup up Arpanet, and without Apranet there would have been no internet"
> 
> Talk about being misquoted, you don't have to believe me, do your own research and see for yourself.


Considering that the Defense Department developed the ARPANET throughout the 60's with full deployment in 1969, how is Al Gore's statement not ridiculous? He didn't even get out of Army bootcamp until Oct 69. Taken out of context or not, Al Gore was not in any way shape or form a contributor to the ARPANET.


----------



## Darkman (Apr 16, 2002)

HDTVFanAtic said:


> You clearly didn't see the afterhours action. The news did not hit until 6PM.


ya..

I agree... - Tivo's stock is really up btw this, Monday, morning


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

HDMe said:


> Yeah... I was also thinking earlier about some TVs I have seen that have these features available built-in or as an add-on. I know Toshiba, for instance, makes a DVR for use with their TVs... so if you have cable service and use the cablecard plugin, you can use their external DVR to record/timeshift programs... and the TVs come with dual-digital-OTA tuners so you could also record and/or watch an OTA digital program at the same time!
> .


Someone with a single VCR and a cable connection can use a cable splitter to record one channel while watching a different channel on the TV.

Someone with two VCRs can tune to one VCR to watch a movie, while the Coax-IN goes to the second VCR to record.

There's nothing innovative here... they're just bundling mutiple products into a single box. Prior Art basically says that this patent is bogus as the capability that they're claiming as unique could have been (and was) being done beforehand by consumers.

One thing that MIGHT be patentable is being able to record and play from the same event simultaneously (aka. the pausing feature allowing the recorder to continue while viewing a different time segment of the same show, which can not be done on a physically streaming medium such as videotape.) Actually, something very much like this:

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache...42+TIVO+patent+uspto&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1



> TiVo has also acquired the exclusive right to license and enforce U.S. patent number 5,241,428 entitled Variable-Delay Video Recorder known in the industry as the Goldwasser Patent. Filed in March 1991, the Goldwasser Patent is one of the earliest patents regarding digital video recorders of which TiVo is aware. This patent covers devices that permit the simultaneous recording and playback of video material with a variable time delay between recording and playback of a given video program segment.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

HDMe said:


> I hear you. I worked for a similar company, and I remember the memos that were regularly sent around to remind everyone to document everything and to let the right people know if you ever did anything that might be patentable so they could go for it.
> 
> I also remember tallies that were emailed around to announce how many patents had been applied for by department and company-wide... like it was another quantity over quality contest!


Definitely quantity over quality. They made it so lucrative (Money wise) that employees got into a room together and after a meeting had 30+ patent applications.

I read some of them and they I thought.. WOW... And the majority of these were getting dumped into the patent office. Scary stuff.


----------



## Kricket (Nov 18, 2005)

JohnL said:


> Fifty,
> 
> Al Gore "NEVER" said he invented the internet. That quote is repeating ad nausem on Network TV, it was completely taken out of context.
> 
> ...


actually - im pretty sure he was referring to this quote that al gore stated in a march 9, 1999 interview with wolf blitzer (who asked something like "what qualifies you for the democratic nomination over bill bradley" or something to that effect):

"during my service in the united states congress, i took the initiative in *creating* the internet" (emphasis added)

so, technically, gore DID say he created the internet

im not taking sides here - im just pointing out a fact - and we all know that he didnt _mean_ to say "creating" (he probably meant something like "promoting" or "advancing") - but, nonetheless, he DID say it

heres the transcript so you can see for yourself:

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/03/09/president.2000/transcript.gore/

EDIT - although i have to say - i do believe that gore was pretty instrumental in pushing for the internet - he was important in the idea of getting it out publically...


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

koralis said:


> Someone with a single VCR and a cable connection can use a cable splitter to record one channel while watching a different channel on the TV.


I do this with my dual-tuner cable HD-DVR. I can record two programs and watch a third with a split cable bypassing the box and connecting directly to my tv's RF input.



> One thing that MIGHT be patentable is being able to record and play from the same event simultaneously (aka. the pausing feature allowing the recorder to continue while viewing a different time segment of the same show...


Actually, my first PVR, the DishPlayer 7200, now semi-retired, accomplished this with ease -- even without needing to invoke the record function. The DP uses a continuous buffer to accomplish this. Rather clever, I thought. The 7200/7100 embodied superior technology at the time (1999/200), and in many ways, particularly with the elegant EPG interface, is still superior.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

HDMe said:


> But I never remember people calling them generically "Betamax" unless they actually were Betamax VCRs.


VCRs were often known as "Beta(max) machines" up through about 1983 when VHS began to catch on. The Beta name was so important to Sony that they didn't really give up on it until analog ENG equipment disappeared altogether.

Also, don't believe Micro$oft's research on VHS which attributes the invention of VHS to Panasonic; we all know that distinction belongs to Japan Victor Corporation.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

JohnL said:


> What Al Gore said was, "I was one of the original supporters and helped setup up Arpanet, and without Apranet there would have been no internet"
> 
> Talk about being misquoted, you don't have to believe me, do your own research and see for yourself.


This is what Al Gore said when he was cornered on the original Internet quote. Somewhere on the Internet, there is a complete timeline of Al Gore's references to his relationship to the development of the Internet and he did, in fact, make the claim. He later explained that what he said wasn't what he meant.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Ron Barry said:


> 1) A revenue generating mechanism, "Remember the JPEG patent" and who holds that one?


The Forgent patent will likely come up about the time that the Echostar irritation subsides. Then again, if they pull a TiVo and don't assert their rights soon, they will lose them.


> Well i hope that if the patent is as broad as it sounds, I hope it gets overturned. If not, Dish is not the only ones that will feel the pain.


The bulk of the TiVo Time Warp patent is diagrams. These diagrams clearly show the "media switch" to be central to the whole design. Without the media switch, I'm not sure it means anything.

A link to the patent has been posted in this thread as well as others.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

harsh said:


> VCRs were often known as "Beta(max) machines" up through about 1983 when VHS began to catch on. The Beta name was so important to Sony that they didn't really give up on it until analog ENG equipment disappeared altogether.


I just don't remember it that way. Maybe it was a regional thing? I forget exactly when we got our VCR, but I believe it was at or around 1980... and we got a VHS mainly because the video rental place (WAY before Blockbuster) stocked mostly VHS. They also had a few LaserDiscs as I remember too... but they didn't have many Betas.



harsh said:


> Also, don't believe Micro$oft's research on VHS which attributes the invention of VHS to Panasonic; we all know that distinction belongs to Japan Victor Corporation.


I wish I had all my memory on instant recall... I know about JVC, even though a lot of folks don't I guess... but also, even they didn't really innovate. I forget where and what, but similar technology (the way the tilted heads of the VCR were aligned and worked) was around in WWII and that was essentially where the idea eventually can be traced back to.

My brain is failing me to names and details at the moment.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

harsh said:


> VCRs were often known as "Beta(max) machines" up through about 1983 when VHS began to catch on. The Beta name was so important to Sony that they didn't really give up on it until analog ENG equipment disappeared altogether.


Actually, BetaMax video gear is still widely used today in mobile broadcast tv applications.


----------



## absolutic (Dec 6, 2005)

What I want to know is whether us, the consumer, will bear the cost of the law suit by having to pay increased dvr fees. You know exactly how it works, Echostar is going to say: well we have to pay the patent fees now, so we will increase your dvr fee by $5 a month. In real life, we, the consumers, always end up paying. I am very unhappy about this, who cares about the logo, I just don't want to pay more for the same services!


----------



## kwajr (Apr 7, 2004)

hgeyer said:


> A few interesting quotes from an article from Wall Street Journal Online:
> 
> "TiVo general counsel Matthew Zinn said the verdict won't affect existing users of EchoStar's DVR, but the company will ask the judge to prevent future DVR shipments by the company, though the judge may allow shipments to continue during an appeal."
> 
> ...


isnt it possible that this is the whole reason they have had the fees in case something like this happened


----------



## Doug Higley (Dec 31, 2005)

I bought my first VHS (Panasonic) in 1978 for $1400. VHS was already well established...my first commercially produced movies were titles from Warner Bros and other majors. (The Wild Bunch was the reason I bought the machine!) Movies were about $79 then) Betamax was viable but already not a favorite at that time...I did advertising for the store and the VHS machines were flying out the door. Betamax was the Mac of the day or Saturn...had it's fans...was extremely high quality BUT...


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

Nick said:


> Actually, BetaMax video gear is still widely used today in mobile broadcast tv applications.


No. Beta*cam* gear is still used for _some_ ENG (Electronic News Gathering) applications.

If you popped one of those Betacam tapes in your Betamax you would see ziltch, nada, nothing but snow.

About the only thing that survived from the original Betamax was the tape cartridge. The tape inside, as well as the speed is radically different.

Betamax's big mistake was the early obsolesence of the original (Beta I) machines. When the long-play versions came out (Beta II, III) they were not compatible withthe original Beta I tapes. VHS OTOH always supported SP. Even LP, which is no longer used, can still be played on machines that record in SP/EP.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

> "Beta*cam* gear is still used for _some_ ENG (Electronic News Gathering) applications."


Thanks for the correction. :blush:


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

kwajr said:


> isnt it possible that this is the whole reason they have had the fees in case something like this happened


If that is what my DVR fee is for it's time for me to pitch the 921 and go back to a standard IRD.


----------



## HDTVFanAtic (Jul 23, 2005)

Darkman said:


> ya..
> 
> I agree... - Tivo's stock is really up btw this, Monday, morning


The 6 month chart tells the tale:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=TIVO&t=3m&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

Which quite frankly, surprises me as I don't belive long term prospects were good for Tivo before this ruling.

Also, if you know ANYTHING about basic Market T/A, you would know that 99% of gaps get filled. The huge gap created between Friday close, afterhours and Barron's suggesting Dish should buy Tivo was destined to be filled.

The real story is what happens from here with the gap filled.

And if you really want to get into Market T/A, put a piece of paper on the 2 peaks 4 months ago and see that the resistance has now become support with the low in April bouncing right back off that line - you can see where that line is headed.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Michael P said:


> No. Beta*cam* gear is still used for _some_ ENG (Electronic News Gathering) applications.


In my local market, tape-based recording is largely been relegated to cable access where DV formats are used. ENG is done with arrays of off-the-shelf flash memory, compact hard drives and other tapeless technologies.

It makes sense because it rains a lot here and nobody wants to see a dew light.


----------



## Anonymous (Jun 19, 2004)

Hard disk based time shifting is how TV stations have been doing instant replays and slo-mos since the 80s:

from:
http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/Media-Server-Tech/a_from_tape_to_disk.shtml

COMPLIMENTARY COMPOSITING

From 1984 going forward, more discrete production quality moving image digital-disk recording products appeared. Products from companies such as Quantel and Abekas also brought out complimentary compositing systems. For example, Abekas produced a stand -- alone digital -- disk recorder, the A60, which recorded 25 seconds of NTSC video onto two Y/UV disk drives, and gave rise to the Abekas A62 (in composite format) and the Abekas A64 (in component digital) formats-pairs of A60 series drives linked with video mixing, layering, and graphics control processors.

It was 1989 when Avid Technology introduced and shipped the original Avid/1 Media Composer, setting off the digital-desktop editing revolution that would change video and film production forever. The non -- linear editor used proprietary motion -- JPEG imagining on a Macintosh platform, and external SCSI drives for storage.

Since the introduction of the early video-disk recording device, the television industry has functionally transformed the disk recorder from a sports replay device into a tool with extensions well beyond those first single-purpose applications. Even with the 1991 introduction of HDTV disk recording by Philips, with the HDDR-1000; it would take two or three more years before disk recording concepts would mature to the level that a professional video server could be developed and sold, e.g., one of the first Tektronix Profiles, introduced in 1995.

Today, throughout major broadcast and content-delivery centers, spinning disks are becoming the mainstay for moving image asset storage and playback. What once took 50, 24 -- inch diameter disk drives to store just 5 MB of 7 -- bit data; we now see redundant mirrored multi -- terabyte disk arrays attached to protected DVD -- RAM storage in similar footprints consuming an area about the size of the average living room. We can only wonder where the next 50 years will take us.

TiVo seems to think that because their technology is for the consumer rather than for professionals they can patent it even though at the time of the patent the implementation was identical to many devices already being sold to and used by broadcasters at the time.


----------



## Anonymous (Jun 19, 2004)

but they didn't want to, this way, they can make TiVo hemerage money they don't have on legal costs that will ultimately end with TiVo's patent being thrown out. Thus, be not easily presenting the Hard Disk based time shifting technologies that were already on the market before TiVo to the jury, Dish has ensured TiVo's bankruptcy because TiVo will continue to pay lawers for something they can't ultimately win.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

But once again, that equipment is for instant replays and slow-mos, not for use in buffering live television.


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> It more then recording things like a VCR, it's all name based recordings. I can record whatever I want and ignore the schedule. I don't have to worry about extended episodes, new times, new days, special airings, repeats. My DVR takes care of that for me. If I still had the ole 508 POS, I would have missed the final part of the season finale of The Shield, would have missed a special War At Home last month and just this past week would have missed the special showing of Conviction this past Tuesday night. No VCR can do that, and most of the Dish DVRs can't do it that reliability, if you think that's the same as a VCR so be it. I've been using real DVRs for over two years now with the DirecTiVo and now my Scientific Atlanta 8300HD and neither of them come close to the non-reliability of the 501 and two 508s I owned


Having just upgraded from my POS 508 which did everything I ever wanted to my new 622 with this ever so talked about "Named based recording" I just wanted to comment...

Now instead of taping what I want one at a time I now have 10 zillion episodes of programs I do not want! Sure I can set it to only tape new shows but if you are like me and watch mostly repeats this name based stuff is silly.

I now spend far more time erasing unwanted episodes than I ever did picking what I wanted to tape for the week. NBR is great for new shows but near useless for repeats. If you only watch new network shows then NBR is a godsend. If you want to watch non-firstrun shows that you may not have seen then NBR is not so neat 

Sometimes the K.I.S.S. method is the best and my 508 was a K.I.S.S. machine in it's glory. My wife could work it! Now I have a few extra steps when I simply want to tape a show from the menu.

Mind you I love the 622 and think it's a great machine but aside from this name based stuff the DVR portion is near identical IMHO.

I have seen all the wonderfull TIVO features but I equate TIVO to Microsoft Office. All many people want to do is to pick and record shows from the menu. I don't want to pay for all sorts of features I will not use ala Office when all I need is to type a paper.

So some people bash Dish because their DVR's do not have a zillion features but to most people they do 100% what they need in a simple and easy way.

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

Greg Bimson said:


> But once again, that equipment is for instant replays and slow-mos, not for use in buffering live television.


And the difference is?

Kind of like saying that "my" PVR device is only for taping sitcoms and yours is for taping dramas.

They both do the very same thing! While instant replay may not be as long as taping an entire show it's the same identical principle. Last time I checked... a sporting even was "live TV" *smiles*

-JB


----------



## jrb531 (May 29, 2004)

JohnL said:


> Fifty,
> 
> Al Gore "NEVER" said he invented the internet. That quote is repeating ad nausem on Network TV, it was completely taken out of context.
> 
> ...


Hmmm funny that I heard him specifically claim that he helped create the internet. I guess I heard him wrong ROTFL. Trying to think of the quote but he specifically said that he was a part of the organization that created the internet - not Arcnet but the internet.

Now how many hundreds of thousands of people were on that committee? Did they all create the internet too? *smiles*

-JB


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Because the patent covers the ability to record a live tv buffer and be able to rewind, fast forward, and pause this buffer, while recording another. Or even just being able to record a program while watching another pre-recorded program. Just because something may be the identical principle does not mean it is the identical process. And processes can be patented. Otherwise, the telephone would have never been patented as it was simply an extension of the telegraph.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

JohnL said:


> Al Gore "NEVER" said he invented the internet. That quote is repeating ad nausem on Network TV, it was completely taken out of context.
> 
> What Al Gore said was, "I was one of the original supporters and helped setup up Arpanet, and without Apranet there would have been no internet"


John,

When posting corrections it is best to actually post a correction, not some other text.


Al Gore said:


> *I took the initiative in creating the Internet.*


http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=459703#post459703

Under heavy fire he did eventually correct himself, but those were the words he used to start that argument over seven years ago.

We now return you to bickering over Tivo and patent law.


----------



## Kagato (Jul 1, 2002)

The judge is still considering the award. Because the Jury said it was willful, the damages can be doubled or trippled.

Still up in the air, documents E* has been withholding from the court and Tivo. The release has been ordered several times by Fulsoms Texas court, and the US Appeals court. 

The thought is these documents talk about possible patent issues. Not only making it possible to have damages enhanced, but also tank the appeal. If they aren't released a number of "bad things"(TM) could happen to E*.


----------



## Kagato (Jul 1, 2002)

James Long said:


> John,
> 
> When posting corrections it is best to actually post a correction, not some other text.http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=459703#post459703
> 
> ...


Interesting side note. Charlie Ergen was Al Gore's largest individual donner in the 2000 election cycle.


----------



## Fifty Caliber (Jan 4, 2006)

James Long said:


> We now return you to bickering over Tivo and patent law.


Can we bicker about DVR fees as well?


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

Kagato said:


> Interesting side note. Charlie Ergen was Al Gore's largest individual donner in the 2000 election cycle.


Probably because Al Gore invented DBS. :sure:


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Actually the full sentence uttered by Gore was "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." It was part of a larger discussion about how the government fostered the growth and expansion of the internet. 


Context matters. Personally I think he took too much credit. But at no point did he ever say he invented the internet---or anything else. But he was an outspoken advocate of it early on and his role in that regard has been cited by a number of people in the technical community----though none have ever said he "invented " the internet.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

Kagato said:


> Interesting side note. Charlie Ergen was Al Gore's largest individual donner in the 2000 election cycle.


Individual donations were capped at I believe $2,000. Are you talking about a corporate donation?

That year Ergen himself gave $778,050 to various candidatesd and causes. 48% to each party or candistes thereof and 4 % to issue oriented groups.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

We now return you to bickering over Tivo and patent law.

PLEASE - stop posting about other issues in this thread.


----------



## UTFAN (Nov 12, 2005)

James Long said:


> We now return you to bickering over Tivo and patent law.
> 
> PLEASE - stop posting about other issues in this thread.


Does this make us the battling Bickersons?

Hook'em ya'll and have a great weekend.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Anonymous said:


> Hard disk based time shifting is how TV stations have been doing instant replays and slo-mos since the 80s:


What does "time shifting" have to do with "Time Warp"???

The answer is very little. None of the network or local TV producers record the finished program on the same decks that are doing slow motion or instant replay. These units do not record while they are searching for or playing back "the big play". Uninterrupted recording is unique to DVRs.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

It just starts to get a little silly some of the processes that are getting patents.

The next thing you know we will find out that someone has a patent on making a bologna sandwich by putting the bread down, then bologna, then cheese, then mustard, then more bread... and we'll find out that we all owe someone money each time we make our own bologna sandwich and violate his patent!


----------



## RoyD (Jul 27, 2002)

HDMe said:


> It just starts to get a little silly some of the processes that are getting patents.
> 
> The next thing you know we will find out that someone has a patent on making a bologna sandwich


 I think Smucker's has like 3 patents on peanut butter and jelly sandwich

(a) providing a first slices of bread with an edge crust;

(b) applying a layer of peanut butter onto said first slice in an area inside said crust and defining a substance free outer periphery of said first slice;

(c) applying a layer of fruit spread over said peanut butter layer leaving a perimeter of uncovered peanut butter;

(d) covering said layer of fruit spread by a second layer of peanut butter contacting said first layer of peanut butter to encapsulate said fruit spread;

(e) applying a second slice of bread over said first slice of bread with an edge crust matching said the edge crust of said first slice;


----------



## wje (Mar 8, 2006)

HDMe said:


> It just starts to get a little silly some of the processes that are getting patents...


It's totally out of control. The gov. is finally starting to try to fix things, but I don't hold out a lot of hope. This has been going on for a looong time. The earliest really stupid patent grant I remember is one back in the 60's or so given to a company that patented displaying a cursor on a screen. (yes. really) The patent was upheld on appeal. This was a hardware patent, but it was so totally obvious that no engineer could understand why it was granted. (for the curious, they patented the idea of XORing the pixels under the cursor with 1, in order to create a reverse image at the cursor location).

I consider the TiVo's patent to be equally obvious and just as absurd. A disk is a random-access device. Why wouldn't you use it that way?

Part of the problem is that when a patent is challenged, the jury doesn't have the knowledge to understand what is obvious to somone familiar with the technology and what isn't. (that's supposedly one of the key requrements that has to be met to get a patent in the first place... it can't be trivial ,or obvious to someone in the field).


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

But the parties involved don't WANT the jurors to be familar with technology - Ideally, this "trial" should have been held in Silicon Valley / Raleigh or other places of concentrated high technology. Can you imagine Tivo's chances in that kind of venue ? - About zero, I'd guess...


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

But why sue just Dish network ? Why not evryone else - like comcast or motorola or sc. atlanta ?


----------



## dave1234 (Oct 9, 2005)

nataraj said:


> But why sue just Dish network ? Why not evryone else - like comcast or motorola or sc. atlanta ?


Because Dish has the biggest potential pot of gold and TIVO disliked Dish more than the others 

Biggest Pot of gold because damages are awarded based on the offending products total cost, not the incremental value the invention adds to the product. That times the number of products was a relatively big number.

What I don't understand is why TIVO didn't sue RCA. RCA has been using NTSC inputs on their tuners since the 1950's. TIVO claims the NTSC input is part of the patent. I would have thought that would be a really big number.


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

dave1234 said:


> Because Dish has the biggest potential pot of gold and TIVO disliked Dish more than the others


I think TiVo is becoming like SCO - a lawyer based company than an engr based company. Sad.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

nataraj said:


> I think TiVo is becoming like SCO - a lawyer based company than an engr based company. Sad.


Imagine for a moment what TiVo represents. Their inventory is their patent portfolio and a couple of trademarks. Their income comes from subscription and licensing fees. While TiVo can't get caught with inventory, they can't easily liquidate subscriptions and without their portfolio, they are toast.

TiVo needs to remain vigilant in making sure that their inventory isn't devalued and that often requires the services of lawyers to identify those who are stealing "inventory".


----------



## nataraj (Feb 25, 2006)

harsh said:


> Their inventory is their patent portfolio and a couple of trademarks.


All they actually had was an idea ... and as we know that is not patentable. As others have noted their patents will not stand for long ... You can't come up with one idea and think of making money on it forever. Finally if you can't compete in the market its time to say goodbye ...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

RoyD said:


> I think Smucker's has like 3 patents on peanut butter and jelly sandwich
> 
> (a) providing a first slices of bread with an edge crust;
> 
> ...


Ok... I should be good and not owe royalties then...

I don't put peanut butter on both sides... and I always end up with peanut butter on the outside of the bread and on my hands. My knife spreading accuracy could use a little work!


----------



## Anonymous (Jun 19, 2004)

Greg Bimson said:


> Because the patent covers the ability to record a live tv buffer and be able to rewind, fast forward, and pause this buffer, while recording another. Or even just being able to record a program while watching another pre-recorded program. Just because something may be the identical principle does not mean it is the identical process. And processes can be patented. Otherwise, the telephone would have never been patented as it was simply an extension of the telegraph.


They have been using the identical process. Instant replays for Broadcast are based on Analog to digital converter + hard drive + computer + software. No difference in process what so ever and even the technical details are the same. And if you watch sporting events, you know that occasionally the replay at normal speed or at slow speed or even backwards. No difference in capability, No difference in function, No difference in technique. The patent clerks simply failed to do their job.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Anonymous said:


> They have been using the identical process. Instant replays for Broadcast are based on Analog to digital converter + hard drive + computer + software. No difference in process what so ever and even the technical details are the same. And if you watch sporting events, you know that occasionally the replay at normal speed or at slow speed or even backwards. No difference in capability, No difference in function, No difference in technique. The patent clerks simply failed to do their job.


Then maybe you should have been legal counsel to Echostar. If it were _that_ obvious, then Dish Network should have won.


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

Greg Bimson said:


> Then maybe you should have been legal counsel to Echostar. If it were _that_ obvious, then Dish Network should have won.


Challenges to the Patents themselves are still pending. Dish was found to have violated the patents. The case had nothing to do with the underlying validity of the patents.


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

Greg Bimson said:


> Then maybe you should have been legal counsel to Echostar. If it were _that_ obvious, then Dish Network should have won.


In Jury trails even a person whom everyone knows killed their wife (oJ) get off scott free.

In SF Mike White whom the whole city watch as he shoot to death our Mayor got off scott free on the twinkee defense. Their is no why to tell how a Jury would vote or why they vote the way the do.


----------



## LtMunst (Aug 24, 2005)

tomcrown1 said:


> In Jury trails even a person whom everyone knows killed their wife (oJ) get off scott free.


But the glove don't fit! :lol:


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

tomcrown1 said:


> In Jury trails even a person whom everyone knows killed their wife (oJ) get off scott free.
> 
> In SF Mike White whom the whole city watch as he shoot to death our Mayor got off scott free on the twinkee defense. Their is no why to tell how a Jury would vote or why they vote the way the do.


And in both cases, these were criminal cases where defendants were found not guilty.

In this civil case, the defendant was found guilty. So, in our legal system were any defendant can "get off scott free", Dish Network did not.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Greg Bimson said:


> Then maybe you should have been legal counsel to Echostar. If it were _that_ obvious, then Dish Network should have won.


I think the problem comes in... the jury most likely, if they were paying attention, based their verdict on the patent being valid. IF the patent was valid, then they probably had no choice but to rule in favor of TiVo.

BUT, the patent is being challenged, as others have mentioned... and assuming Dish wins there... then the other house of cards will fold and TiVo will retroactively lose the other case.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

HDMe said:


> BUT, the patent is being challenged, as others have mentioned... and assuming Dish wins there... then the other house of cards will fold and TiVo will retroactively lose the other case.


Of course the patent is being challenged. If you lose a patent case, the first thing the defendant does is attempt to invalidate the patent.

And, although 40 percent of patent claims get invalidated, that means 60 percent do not. Which means that based on odds, TiVo's patent is more likely to withstand scrutiny than to fail.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Anonymous said:


> They have been using the identical process.


The process is not identical nor even close. It is a different process to arrive at a decidedly different result.


> Instant replays for Broadcast are based on Analog to digital converter + hard drive + computer + software.


Instant replay is not done using computers nor software and it isn't done with analog to digital converters. As such, your argument is hollow.


> No difference in process what so ever and even the technical details are the same.


You haven't looked at the TiVo patent in question, have you? It describes a complicated process of interleaving and a compression method that isn't used in in production television.


> And if you watch sporting events, you know that occasionally the replay at normal speed or at slow speed or even backwards. No difference in capability,


Other than the simple fact that an instant replay buffer doesn't continue to record the game while it is doing all of these functions.


> No difference in function,


Other than the ability to set lots of cue points and use a job wheel.


> No difference in technique.


At the most general level, both the DVR and the replay buffer record material to the hard drive, but how they lay down the information and access it is substantially different.


> The patent clerks simply failed to do their job.


I submit that it is you that has failed to do due diligence in making your claims. I might also argue that the Echostar defense failed to impress upon the jurors that there is a distinct difference between the technology in the TiVo patent and that used by Echostar. The end result is the same, but it wasn't a question of the functionality; it was a question of using the specific technology without permission.


----------

