Mind posting your contract that states you signed up for DVR service ? You signed up for programming. So long as they aren't charging the DVR fee, you're out nothing.
Tivo hearing today?
- Thread starter danknapp76
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 246
- Views 28K
For those who are thinking you may get out of your contracts because your DVRs may be shut off, forget about it.
1) If the DVRs eventually have to be shut off, all DISH has to do is to move you to a non-DVR package. Remember the saying "subject to change without notice"? It is in the fine print.
2) But your DVRs will not be shut, because DISH is not in contempt, but if the judge decides to teach DISH a lesson and finds DISH in contempt anyway, DISH can appeal, and the ruling will be overturned, but even if the ruling may be upheld, your DVRs will still not likely to be turned off because DISH will settle with Tivo, to agree to a license deal so everything will continue as if nothing had happened, from the users' point of view.
So for those who are really concerned about their DVRs not functioning, stop it! Go back watch your TV. And for those who are thinking they might have a quick and easy way to get out of the contract, try something else instead, like I will move to an apartment and cannot have satellite there, or better yet I am moving to Canada, or whoever has been paying the bills had just passed away, or I have just lost my job...Just a few reasons I have heard before that were used to get out of a contract.
1) If the DVRs eventually have to be shut off, all DISH has to do is to move you to a non-DVR package. Remember the saying "subject to change without notice"? It is in the fine print.
2) But your DVRs will not be shut, because DISH is not in contempt, but if the judge decides to teach DISH a lesson and finds DISH in contempt anyway, DISH can appeal, and the ruling will be overturned, but even if the ruling may be upheld, your DVRs will still not likely to be turned off because DISH will settle with Tivo, to agree to a license deal so everything will continue as if nothing had happened, from the users' point of view.
So for those who are really concerned about their DVRs not functioning, stop it! Go back watch your TV. And for those who are thinking they might have a quick and easy way to get out of the contract, try something else instead, like I will move to an apartment and cannot have satellite there, or better yet I am moving to Canada, or whoever has been paying the bills had just passed away, or I have just lost my job...Just a few reasons I have heard before that were used to get out of a contract.
IIRC, some DVRs have their s/w in firmware. Some, like the 721, have at least part of it on the HDD. So when my HDDs have died in the 721s that have come thru my home, the 721s stopped working. I still love that 721 of mine. When it's working.
It seems some folks like to stir the pot.
And some folks like to run around screaming like their hair is on fire.
It seems some folks like to stir the pot.
And some folks like to run around screaming like their hair is on fire.
If charlie loses the patent battle with tivo what is stop him from swapping all his boxes with another manufacturer such as scientific atlanta or motorola??
I just sent back a 508 with a failed hard drive and it wouldn't work as a receiver. In fact, after a few seconds of black, it would reboot.
1. The fact that they don't currently manufacture satellite receivers
2. Cost
3. Control over the design and implementation
The new MPEG4-only DVRs are in full production, those people who might be impacted can easily be switched to the Eastern Arc with the new receivers. For those on the west coast, 622s or 722s for replacement
Unfortunately it wouldn't happen because the DVRs will not be disabled.
Unfortunately it wouldn't happen because the DVRs will not be disabled.
I personally dont think they will be disabled.
If Tivo had a clear cut case against Dish the Judge would have ordered them in contempt already.
I do hope we see Tivo and Dish working together in the future, that would be great for everyone.
If Tivo had a clear cut case against Dish the Judge would have ordered them in contempt already.
I do hope we see Tivo and Dish working together in the future, that would be great for everyone.
I'm not following that logic. If Dish had a clear cut case the judge would have ruled them not in contempt. See, it works both ways. The reality is that judges don't rule from the bench. They write up their rulings with rationale. It takes time.
It doesn't matter if Dish has a clear cut case or not - the burden of proof is on the Tivo, all Dish has to do is refute any "evidence" Tivo may come up with. It doesn't work both ways unless Dish is counter-suing Tivo...
I problem. DISH has already been found guilty. This is all about complying with the injuction. Which they obviously haven't.
If it were that obvious the judge would likely have ruled. Obviously it's not that obvious.
The premise was that if Dish did that well then the judge would provide an immediate ruling. It works both ways.
No good defense will drop all of its cards on the table in one shot. A good defense will play only enough cards to win so that, if there is an appeal later, it still has cards up its sleeve.
Appeals are based on whether a procedural error is made by the judge. "New cards" aren't allowed (or germane).
The new MPEG4-only DVRs are in full production, those people who might be impacted can easily be switched to the Eastern Arc with the new receivers. For those on the west coast, 622s or 722s for replacement
Unfortunately it wouldn't happen because the DVRs will not be disabled.
There are no MPEG-4-only DVRs that I've heard of. The MPEG-4 receivers also receive MPEG-2, since there are many channels still in MPEG-2. No point in producing limited capability boxes just for EA.
And I doubt there are ten million plus receivers out there just waiting to be shipped out.
Oh, so the validity of Tivo's patents, which is what Echostar's appeal to the 2005 ruling was based on, is "a procedural error made by the judge"? Interesting.
We are talking about appeal of a contempt ruling, not the validity of the patents, that has already been proven.
