TIVO vs E*
- Thread starter Juan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 2K
- Views 179K
- Status
Surreal world? We are holding the DVRs in our hands, we are lloking at the real deal right there.
The law tries to make it surreal so they can define the technology in ways they can understand in their ignorance, and fail the purpose of the patent system as a result!
And what you said is exactly the problem. Without the technology you would have no patents. Thus the tech comes first. Now if the patent trumps the technology as you say, and appears to be happening here, than you have accurately illustrated why the patent system fails. Why it does more to hinder innovation than preserve it. It puts the source of the innovation, the technology itself, behind the words, and that's not right. That's where it fails in its intended purpose.
You my friend, have not only perfectly illustrated why the patent system is fundementally flawed, why a patent should be given no credibility whatsoever by free-thinkers, and why tivo is essentially corrupt taking advantage of a corrupt system. You have essentially dammed the very system you are attempting to advocate.
And did it all within the scope of your last post when you said the words trump technology. Because if you believe that such an abomination be acceptible, than you've dammed your own credibility as well. For any advocate of a corrupt system...is, well...just that.
The opposing view believes the patent is invalid and DISH/SATS doesn't infringe, and the technology trumps the words of a patent claim.
Tell me where any of that is rooted in the real world.
Tell me where any of that is rooted in the real world.
Its more real than any of the lies told by lawyers in a courtroom to exploit the ignorance of a judge.
Yet both sides have lawyers. And one group of lawyers flat out told Judge Folsom that they did adhere to the injunction, yet disabled nothing.vampz26 said:
And this of course is getting appealed to another group of judges, the same group which originally upheld "the lies told by lawyers in a courtroom to exploit the ignorance of a judge".
I get it. If the crime doesn't fit, the system is to blame.
Excellent news. The drama continues.
Thomas, do you have a source on that so I can post it to the front page?
Cherry pick what you like, the fact remains. The court system and patent systems are fundementally flawed. Everything you posted thus far stand as testimony to that. The only wierd thing is your bizzare attempts to justify it, which of couse you can never do. A flawed and corrupt system can never be justified.
And attempting to take a moral highground above it all changes nothing.
No crime was committed, except by tivo who committed acts of extortion and used the flaws in the system to do it.
And if you're fine with that corrupt line of thinking, than go buy one of mainer tee-shirts. ;D
What about the damages? Usually the condition for a stay of order is the defendants deposit a bond in the plaintiffs’ account. Though last time E* had to put the entire $94M in escrow and TiVo did not get it (plus the interest) until E* exhausted all appeals.
If the stay is not lifted then the order is stayed.
The judges have not ruled on the stay. It is a separate issue. The clerk was able to go through the relatively automatic actions of docketing the case, setting a date for the appellant to submit a brief, and to notify the parties. A decision on whether to grant a stay pending the appeal will be far from automatic.
Is that probability your opinion, or did you see that on PACER. I know I saw nothing on PACER about the stay.
Excellent news. The drama continues.
Thomas, do you have a source on that so I can post it to the front page?
Rocky what about you? I am sure some docs are already available at the Circuit.
Never said it would be automatic, if it were automatic, the parties would not have argued on the stay issue and this thread would have been 50 pages shorter
I know you realize that the point I am making is that the docketing of the case and the granting of a stay have no correlation whatsoever in the workings of the court. One thing happening has no bearing on the other thing happening.Never said it would be automatic, if it were automatic, the parties would not have argued on the stay issue and this thread would have been 50 pages shorter
No, not if they are not finding it on Pacer. We have a call into Dish; but it sounds like its just that the case has been docketed, if I am reading the posts correctly.
I have called Dish and no one knows anything, but if they hear something they will let us know.
According to Thomas22, E*'s briefing was already scheduled by 8/17/09, if so the appeal is formally on its way, I thought the desicion on stay or not should come at the same time?
I doubt people there are allowed to say anything even if they know, until an official press release.
Sure. Like I said the case has been docketed and the administrative wheels are turning. Dish has been given a date to submit their briefing document to the court. At which time it will be reviewed. After review, perhaps it will be deemed a frivolous appeal and the appellant dealt with accordingly, perhaps it will be simply dismissed, perhaps the court, if they see merit, will entertain a response from the appelee. All that has been accomplished is getting a spot on the docket, kind of like getting an appointment with the doctor.
The issue that is before the judges right now is whether to grant a stay pending the appeal. And, if you study the circumstances of this case, and how the last appeal is going to affect this one, and also understand the circumstances under which the appeals court can take on a case where contempt has been found by the circuit court, then you will also understand that a stay is highly unlikely.
- Status
Similar threads
- Article
