TIVO lawsuit update
- Thread starter JH1949
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 124
- Views 24K
If they were smart, it'd be already done, either released without us knowing or ready to release... if the latter is the case, expect massive new downloads spooling soon...
yes but what are the alterations? Time warping. How to you alter the skip ahead and fast forward and reverse without fundamentally altering the function of the DVR? That's going to be interesting.
I think its going to hit E* harder then some think! If it was so easy to bring a DVR into the world ,then why the law suit? Can't E* build thing without stealing TVIO entire plan.
Doesn't E* and Tivo just need to come to an agreement to license the offending patents then E* gets to keep things exactly the way they are, just costs them some $'s. As other have guessed, maybe that's what the DVR fee was meant to help cover.
OK, I thought it was that E* COULD work around the code, not that it's already been rolled out. So what's all the posts then about what happens if E* DVR's get turned off?
That's what Dish Network claims. Dish Network also claimed that it did not infringe any of the software patents in the first place.
What does TiVo claim? TiVo claims that it is not possible to build a Broadcom-based DVR without infringing the software patents. That's why all throughout the case, they referred to the infringing products as "Broadcom DVRs."
Why, yes!
It's not like they didn't see the possibility of the ruling - it's been in process for months now. And, they've said as much, after this ruling, that there won't be an adverse impact for DVR users, because they're no longer using the offending software.
I don't see the contradiction. Just because they stand by their assertion that they didn't infringe, doesn't mean they can't plan to hedge their losses in the event the ruling went against them.
Simple... change the way it 'time warps', slightly tweaking it so it's functionality lies outside the patent. . . engineering... the initial answer is always more simplistic than the actual solution...
As I understand it, the patents mainly address a one-chip solution for all the above mentioned, at a time when chips were expensive. My reading was all 622's and 722's use two-chip design, and software can be re-written to get around the patent.
The way I see it by invalidating the hardware suit, E* actually got what it had been prepared for. They may have to replace many old DVRs with the new design.
Yawn..... This means nothing to us end-users. Our DVRs work today and will continue to work tomorrow just fine. I thought that point was hammered in endlessly in the past. THERE'S NO WAY IN HELL DISH WILL SHUT OFF DVRS OVER THIS.
the DISH press statement states new SW was already deployed to the DVRs. We should have noticed the changes, if any, a while back... so with that said... nothing will happen to our DVRs...
The ViP622 and ViP722 use a BCM7038 DVR CPU plus a BCM7411 MPEG-4 decoder. The new ViP612 uses a single BCM7401 DVR CPU that integrates those two chips.
The Broadcom solutions found in Dish Network's DVRs are 266-300MHZ MIPS CPUs rated at 300-450 DMIPS. These are not high-performance CPUs by any means, but they have built-in hardware acceleration for DVR functions.
Broadcom designed their DVR CPUs to accelerate the patented TiVo software functions. That probably has a lot to do with why TiVo claims that it is not possible to build a non-infringing DVR with these Broadcom CPUs.
At least they were able to fix it with a software change without us noticing any change to our service. Dish still has to pony up the money for past infringement regardless.
