If so should he be on a three-day vacation already?
I read that as contempt for the court.
Its ok to flame the judge. He's not participating in this thread. 
TIVO vs E*
- Thread starter Juan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 2K
- Views 178K
- Status
I read that as contempt for the court.
Its ok to flame the judge. He's not participating in this thread. 
I read that as contempt for the court.
EXCELLENT !!!
I read that as contempt for the court.
One could of course be confused and interpret him as in contempt of the order of this thread, and issue a three-day vacation order, of course you could always stay that vacation order, and later decide if the interpretation is correct or not
Finally the latest E*'s response to TiVo's 6/10 response is an unsealed one. E* filed it on 6/15 so we should see the appeals court's decision on the stay soon.
One could of course be confused and interpret him as in contempt of the order of this thread, and issue a three-day vacation order, of course you could always stay that vacation order, and later decide if the interpretation is correct or not
Funny. Can I fine those in contempt $103M?
I was joking about flaming the judge by the way.
Are you implying E* was flaming the judge?
Anything is possible.
AH, good to have an evening of humor here, instead of techno-speak.
AH, good to have an evening of humor here, instead of techno-speak.
Yup...techno-speak, legal-speak...
Nothing was understood, but the message was loud and clear...
AH, good to have an evening of humor here, instead of techno-speak.
Unfortunately TheKrell wasn't willing to participate, he wasn't joking
I don't blame him, patent trolls suck! I don't consider TiVo patent troll at all, they have this valid invention so far along with many other IPs, they are in the business themselves, and E* did infringe. But TheKrell suspected, so do I, a lot of the members of that ACT trade group might be patent trolls.Anyhow, below is the link to E*'s unsealed reply filed yesterday:
http://southernme.com/DAVY_v_GOLIATH/Tivo%20v%20Echostar/6-15-09_EchoStar_Reply.pdf
But a Google search has yielded this: "ACT has been accused of being an industry front for Microsoft, promoting a Microsoft-friendly agenda in relation to property rights and anti-trust legislation." I thought ACT's goal was to promote small businesses and patent protection. So confused.
Last edited:
Unfortunately TheKrell wasn't willing to participate, he wasn't joking
Anyhow, below is the link to E*'s unsealed reply filed yesterday:
http://southernme.com/DAVY_v_GOLIATH/Tivo%20v%20Echostar/6-15-09_EchoStar_Reply.pdf
But a Google search has yielded this: "ACT has been accused of being an industry front for Microsoft, promoting a Microsoft-friendly agenda in relation to property rights and anti-trust legislation." I thought ACT's goal was to promote small businesses and patent protection. So confused.
I chuckled with when I realized where you found the unsealed reply - on the website of one of the troll's booted from here.
He has a "GO TIVO license plate" and sells t-shirts that say "All your DISH wealth are belong to us - TiVO Investor" I am sure there is a booming business in that. Unfortunately TheKrell wasn't willing to participate, he wasn't joking
Anyhow, below is the link to E*'s unsealed reply filed yesterday:
http://southernme.com/DAVY_v_GOLIATH/Tivo%20v%20Echostar/6-15-09_EchoStar_Reply.pdf
But a Google search has yielded this: "ACT has been accused of being an industry front for Microsoft, promoting a Microsoft-friendly agenda in relation to property rights and anti-trust legislation." I thought ACT's goal was to promote small businesses and patent protection. So confused.
Yet more flaws in the patent system exposed...
I am also in contempt of Tivo for (1) attempting to blackmail other companies into paying exorbitant licensing fees for what is really a rather modest and narrow invention and (2) confusing the court into thinking that Dish still infringes (which I believe they do not), and I'm really in contempt of a court which is (3) trying to destroy Dish with penalties way out of proportion to the "crime". (Yes, I know, this is not a criminal proceeding.) OK, I'm also (4) in contempt of PTO examiners who approve trivia, couched in vague and misleading language, thereby encouraging the aforementioned outrages.
If I have contempt for any members posting here, I'm not telling. I'm just ignoring them.
Speaking of which, are there any Tivo fanboys around here who would deny that most every PC tuner cards and bundled DVR software do not infringe on Tivo's patent? Dish isn't the only company who offers trick play. I imagine Tivo can't do that because the authors of said software can prove they invented the Tivo patented process first. And where is Microsoft in this fight? Didn't they write the software for the 7100/7200 DVRs?
If I have contempt for any members posting here, I'm not telling. I'm just ignoring them.
If true, then all Tivo has to do is sue Microsoft, and that ACT nonsense should vanish.
Speaking of which, are there any Tivo fanboys around here who would deny that most every PC tuner cards and bundled DVR software do not infringe on Tivo's patent? Dish isn't the only company who offers trick play. I imagine Tivo can't do that because the authors of said software can prove they invented the Tivo patented process first. And where is Microsoft in this fight? Didn't they write the software for the 7100/7200 DVRs?
I've basically just accuse tivo of extortion and economic terrorism.
If the shoe fits...
I chuckled with when I realized where you found the unsealed reply - on the website of one of the troll's booted from here.
That site has the most complete filings for this entire litigation. I don't really care which side they are on nor am I bothered by their goal. The TiVo investors have every right to seek maximum return by any means, just like E* investors. I am neither.
But for argument sake if an E* supporter considers them enemy #1, one can still argue it is important to keep your friends close, your enemy closer
Dish sent a letter to Judge Folsom on June 15 saying they don't know whether a design around is possible. So today they don't have a clue on how to do a design around but they knew how to do a design around years ago when they did the ViP design? Did the guy with the recipe die?
I think that is in response to an order from Judge Folsom. He ordered Dish to inform the court before any further re-designs. They sent a letter to inform the court that they are investigating the possibility of further re-designs.
I don't follow patent law very much, so I have a question about his order. It seems that he is telling Dish that if they want to design a DVR, that they must keep him informed of every step they are taking. Is that normal? I can't see a court ordering a company to make their research public. If Dish does come up with a DVR that is totally clear of Tivo's patent, do they have to keep the public appraised of how they are doing it before it is a finished product?
[Direct link to Dish's unsealed appeals court reply to Tivo removed by request.]
Cogent arguments; very persuasive. IMHO Dish should win.
Cogent arguments; very persuasive. IMHO Dish should win.
Last edited:
IMHO Dish won't win.
If fact they haven't won anything this far, why would they win now?
- Status
