All of these questions have been asked and answered many times over. Since I cannot understand your motivation, I'll address your questions the best I can.
You have been provided with the verbiage from Judge Folsom's order many times in multiple threads like this one. However, here is the text once again for our reading displeasure:
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT
Each Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof, are hereby restrained and enjoined, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d), from making, using, offering to sell or selling in the Untied States, the Infringing Products, either alone or in combination with any other product and all other products that are only colorably different therefrom in the context of the Infringed Claims, whether individually or in combination with other products or as a part of another product, and from otherwise infringing or inducing others to infringe the Infringed Claims of the ‘389 patent.
Each Defendant, its officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof, are hereby restrained and enjoined, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d), from making, using, offering to sell or selling in the Untied States, the Infringing Products, either alone or in combination with any other product and all other products that are only colorably different therefrom in the context of the Infringed Claims, whether individually or in combination with other products or as a part of another product, and from otherwise infringing or inducing others to infringe the Infringed Claims of the ‘389 patent.
Again, there is no debating the plain language of the order. Clearly, it is up to Judge Folsom to decide if the VIP Series DVRs are more than colorably different...or tell Tivo to "pound sand" and file separate motions.
You need to check your facts because I was a long-time supporter of Dish fighthing this lawsuit. However, once the jury sided and Tivo...the verdict was uphelp by the appeallate court...the Supreme Court declined to hear Dish's appeal...and Dish was found in contempt of court for failing to obey the court order to disable infringing DVR models...well, my attitude changed. In my opinion Charlie, as the CEO, has a fiduciary obligation to maximize shareholder wealth and increase the price of common stock. Moreover, the CEO must exercise due care to minimize risks, business losses, and comply with all applicable laws and industry regulations. Whether he likes Tivo or not is irrelevant since he must act in a prudent and responsible manner. Again, this was all mentioned in this post which was provided for your reading displeasure. Here is yet another example of why I now disagree with Charlie continuing his verision of the "Spanish Inquisition" as you so eloquently mentioned - because it is costing Dish Network shareholders billions...yes, billions! Dish Network stakeholders (to include customers who are also footing the bill) should be outraged!
Noble...yes! But foolish (see my aforementioned comments) given the history of this case? Absolutely! There is a time to fight and there is a time for diplomacy, which is part of the due care obligation to minimize business losses I already mentioned. Unfortunately, this fight is long over and Dish's so-called "legal strategy and tactics" are doing nothing but costing the company billions. What's not to understand?
So your hopes and dreams are built on the lone disenting opinon of Judge Rader while dismissing the majority opinion of the appeallate court? That's akin to saying the Indianapolis Colts will win Superbowl XLIV on appeal because they scored some points during the game - completely forgetting that New Orleans scored twice as many points. To put this into perspective...Judge Rader's dissenting opinion and $2 will buy you a cup of coffee and nothing more. Looking as history, the odds of this case being heard en banc are very slim; the odds of the contempt motion being overturned en banc are extremely very slim; and the odds of the Supreme Court hearing this case is almost nil. This information has also been posted somewhere in this thread.
Again, I would have been very happy if E* won this case because Tivo's patents have, in my opinion, hurt the consumer DVR market. However, the courts have ruled and ruled and ruled again on this matter...all siding with Tivo. The only one rolling over and dying is Dish - they and their fanboys are in denial and/or too stubborn to realize it. If you're correct and the courts do a 180 and side with Dish...that's great! I just don't see it happening, and I see Dish paying billions to buy their way out of this situation.
Links:
http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-ne...ces-april-30-deadline-tivo-3.html#post2151324
http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-network-forum/207082-dish-buying-tivo-7.html#post2148376
http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-ne...ds-echostar-contempt-tivo-37.html#post2144329
http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-ne...d-taste-their-own-medicine-6.html#post2083435
http://www.satelliteguys.us/general...hey-ergen-show-us-love-tivo-2.html#post523020
I'm just calling it like I see it. While I am not going to get into the issue of whether Thomas is trolling...the guy has been on-the-money when it comes to this case.
Last edited:
