Appeals Court Finds Echostar in Contempt in TIVO Case

[goaliebob99]

The VIP series DVR's 622, 722 and 922 are hardware based
DVR's not software based so they are not affected to be turned off.

According to the judgment, all is all, it doesnt matter any more. Basically if it puts video on to a hard drive, it has to be disabled.

I dont see how echostar can say this was a split decision, there was nothing split about it. Basically the judge said there was no merits to echostar's argument and he /she constantly disagreed with echostar's positions. No way you can spin this judgement.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

That would be the current ViP Line which does not infringe.

We could see a MPEG4 upgrade happen faster because of this, so its not all bad.

 

[goaliebob99]

I dont see how the current vip line doesnt infringe, its still putting data on to the hard drive, unless they are using solid state some how some way.

We conclude that the district court’s injunction was sufficiently clear to bar EchoStar from challenging it now. The injunction expressly proscribes “the DVR functionality” and further clarifies what it means by the term. The order clearly defines the term “Infringing Products” prior to referring to it in the disablement provision. The order then goes on to restate that “[t]he DVR functionality, storage to and playback from a hard disk drive shall not be enabled in any new placements of the Infringing Products.” EchoStar’s argues that this second sentence, because it references new placements, requires that the term “DVR functionality” be read as referring only to infringing software.

We do not agree with the stretched reading of this provision that EchoStar proposes.

 

[HDRoberts]

According to the judgment, all is all, it doesnt matter any more. Basically if it puts video on to a hard drive, it has to be disabled.

I dont see how echostar can say this was a split decision, there was nothing split about it. Basically the judge said there was no merits to echostar's argument and he /she constantly disagreed with echostar's positions. No way you can spin this judgement.

Split as one judge out of 3 agreed with Dish.

 

[KAB]

If im reading this right, Echostar has to turn off ALL DVR Functionality! on ALL DVR's!

You're NOT reading it right. And for future doomsayers, the money for this (not even near payable) has been set aside for a long time.

 

[HDRoberts]

Maybe but if that happens get ready for me to dump Dish!

And go where? At my service level, DirecTV and cable is more than $15/month more.

Maybe I'll see if I can find a DTV Pal DVR out there somewhere.

 

[Modwild]

I've used TiVo and I now have Dish 722k DVR. While they both record and pause, etc., TiVo's software has so many more options available and is far superior to Echostar's (my personal opinion). What I don't understand is what makes the Echostar DVR so different from the Comcast DVR, DirecTv DVR, etc. Is there a reason TiVo only went after Echostar? I've never noticed that the argument extends to DVRs in general, just the Dish DVRs. Or have all the other providers made deals with TiVo already?

I do like the dissenting opinion. Seems to make far more sense. But, in the current climate, I wouldn't expect common sense to make much of an impact on, well, anything.

 

[KAB]

Is there a reason TiVo only went after Echostar?

Because the others paid Tivo royalties, though they are still going after others...can't remember which.

Now I do...AT&T and Verizon.

 

[goaliebob99]

You're NOT reading it right.

Thats exactly what the court said to echostar! LOL

page 12

We disagree and conclude that EchoStar misreads our law.

How can anyone read these things and understand what they say! LOL

 

[uncrules]

I've used TiVo and I now have Dish 722k DVR. While they both record and pause, etc., TiVo's software has so many more options available and is far superior to Echostar's (my personal opinion). What I don't understand is what makes the Echostar DVR so different from the Comcast DVR, DirecTv DVR, etc. Is there a reason TiVo only went after Echostar? I've never noticed that the argument extends to DVRs in general, just the Dish DVRs. Or have all the other providers made deals with TiVo already?

I do like the dissenting opinion. Seems to make far more sense. But, in the current climate, I wouldn't expect common sense to make much of an impact on, well, anything.

Based on this I woudn't be surprised if Tivo started suing some of the others. However, Directv won't be one of them since Tivo and Directv have a signed agreement that among other things, says that the two companies won't sue each other. Not to mention a new Directv Tivo is "supposed" to be coming at some point. So I doubt Tivo would try to sue somebody who is going to be giving them licensing fees.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Bob your reading it wrong. Tivo hasnt sued over the new hardware which is non infringing.

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

 

[uncrules]

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

When would the old DVRs have to be shut off? Is it immediate or does Dish have time to replace the old offending DVRs. I would think that would cost Dish a lot of money.

 

[Mark A Sparks]

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

Exactly which models are the "Old DVR's"?

 

[goaliebob99]

I think this clearly spells it out!

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

The question is "new placements." does that include new Dvr's placed on the market? I would say yes, as earlier, the court stated (paraphrasing) anything that puts data on to the hard drive in the terms of video must be turned off when it comes to echostar being in contempt, and all means all products!

 

[KAB]

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

And those would be any NON-VIP model...correct? i.e. 522/625?

 

[Modwild]

Bob your reading it wrong. Tivo hasnt sued over the new hardware which is non infringing.

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

What were the offending products? And how can it be product specific if hardware is not at issue and the software has changed?

I don't think I see this as a loss for Echostar, but rather an opportunity to bring out even bigger guns to attack the obvious unfair play by TiVo. I was a TiVo beta tester for goodness sakes - now I don't even like the way they play ball. Boooooooooo.

 

[tillerr]

Bob your reading it wrong. Tivo hasnt sued over the new hardware which is non infringing.

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

And what if you own your old DVR? Could this ruling really make Dish turn off equipment that is owned by a customer and was purchased before this whole mess?

 

[whitewolf8214]

That would be the current ViP Line which does not infringe.

We could see a MPEG4 upgrade happen faster because of this, so its not all bad.

what do you mean by the MPEG4 upgrade faster because of this?you mean they swap out old receivers to the new mpeg4 receivers?

 

[goaliebob99]

Bob your reading it wrong. Tivo hasnt sued over the new hardware which is non infringing.

Only the old DVR's would be forced to be shut off.

Thats the link I'm not seeing, is where it states old verus all, or if that was allready hashed out in previous court sessions on which products are in fact infringing and if it was changed with this ruling.

 

[rajmarie]

And those would be any NON-VIP model...correct? i.e. 522/625?

Crap...I have 625 & have lot of programs recorded in it.....so basically I will lose all those recording & my 625 will become just like eg 322. Crap Crap Crap