DISH Network and EchoStar Statement Regarding TiVo & NFL. Go Legal Team!

[Curtis0620]

Let's not over-complicate the simple concept, while over-simplifying the complex concept.

Let's not simplify the fact that echostar has indeed sufficiently advanced DVR technology over the years while TiVo has stagnated. Whether you want to label the vip622 a 'workaround' or the 922 a breakthru, nothing changes the fact that if you continue to build on an existing technology, you inevitably create new technology. That is that E* is doing, and aside from the obvious financial reasons, that is also why delaying these courtroom antics ad nauseum will continue to work in E*s favor.

And likewise, let's not overcomplicate the simple fact that it only takes one simple question to effect an outcome here. And that question was asked...so like I said, we are looking at a whole new ballgame here and the rules keep changing.

Just think, with the validity of the patent being subject to question, that would mean that any ruling on these issues, past, present, or future, are now all based on nothing more than a glorified 'maybe' until that nonsense gets resolved.

TiVo has not stagnated. Check the TiVo sites to see the new features they have developed.

 

[jacmyoung]

...The models of DVR's found infringing are still under jurisdiction of the court. Therefore, the order to disable still stands, to this day. However, since Judge Folsom has to rule on contempt, the order which he issues must reflect the current status of infringement...

Please, there is absolutely no reason for the judge to delay a contempt finding, if he already had found a violation. He can then do all the other things you allege he is doing now, finding of infringement for the purpose of damage assessment, or issuing another injunction, or whatever.

Most times, if the judge had determined a contempt, he will issue such ruling, then set a schedule to discuss what should happen the next. Each side will then again be allowed to argue what level of liability, if any should ensue.

 

[navychop]

I don't, because the order was given when both the hardware & software were found to infringe. The appeals court only upheld the software portion of the verdict, not the hardware. Dish has replaced the software in the affected receivers. Therefore if the Judge concludes the software does not violate the patent, than there will be no contempt.

Questions and viewpoints certainly combine to keep this case interesting. Almost makes me wish I'd become a lawyer, like all the career testing said I should. Almost.

 

[Greg Bimson]

I don't, because the order was given when both the hardware & software were found to infringe. The appeals court only upheld the software portion of the verdict, not the hardware. Dish has replaced the software in the affected receivers.

No, the hardware and the software were not found to infringe. The receivers were found to infringe the "hardware claims" (which contain the software "index table") and the "software claims" (which include hardware functions of a normal receiver).

Therefore by changing the software, that may not change infringement of the "software claims".

Let's not simplify the fact that echostar has indeed sufficiently advanced DVR technology over the years while TiVo has stagnated. Whether you want to label the vip622 a 'workaround' or the 922 a breakthru, nothing changes the fact that if you continue to build on an existing technology, you inevitably create new technology.

Until the 922 was just displayed at CES, which is also built upon Sling technology, the underlying DVR technolgy has been TiVo's, and DISH/SATS has been found to infringe upon that technology. DISH/SATS has tried to workaround the software claims of the patent.

Now we'll see if there is still infringement.

 

[vampz26]

Therefore by changing the software, that may not change infringement of the "software claims".Until the 922 was just displayed at CES, which is also built upon Sling technology, the underlying DVR technolgy has been TiVo's, and DISH/SATS has been found to infringe upon that technology. DISH/SATS has tried to workaround the software claims of the patent.

Now we'll see if there is still infringement.

...or something new and improved all together...

Tivo built upon existing technology to create new technology...

Dish built upon existing technology to create new technology...

Lets face it, if Dish didn't clearly offer the better product and advance the technology, than I doubt Tivo would even care....

Besides, the whole concept of infringement could be rendered a complete and utter joke anyway in the near future....its not impossible...

 

[Greg Bimson]

Lets face it, if Dish didn't clearly offer the better product and advance the technology, than I doubt Tivo would even care....

The infringement suit was filed days over five years ago. That is when this board was rife with complaints on all the DISH/SATS receivers and their "beta testing" among the first adopters. They've improved it.

That is why DirecTV is having a harder time now, as they went the DISH/SATS route and developed their own DVR's. DirecTV is now beta testing among the early adopters. However, TiVo won't bother them because a) they have a deal with DirecTV, and b) DirecTV owns ReplayTV's patents.

 

[vampz26]

The infringement suit was filed days over five years ago. That is when this board was rife with complaints on all the DISH/SATS receivers and their "beta testing" among the first adopters. They've improved it.

That is why DirecTV is having a harder time now, as they went the DISH/SATS route and developed their own DVR's. DirecTV is now beta testing among the early adopters. However, TiVo won't bother them because a) they have a deal with DirecTV, and b) DirecTV owns ReplayTV's patents.

Obviously they've improved it...and TiVo knew they would...

I honestly don't know what D* has to do with any of it, other than the replaytv patents may have something to do with the Tivo patents being brought into question in the first place...