Curtis is right. You know, it really does come down to a 'pick your own poison' discussion in the long run....
(Oh my, did I just say that!
)
TIVO vs E*
- Thread starter Juan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 2K
- Views 178K
- Status
Curtis is right. You know, it really does come down to a 'pick your own poison' discussion in the long run....
(Oh my, did I just say that!
)If we narrowly define public interest as the interest of E* and TiVo's subs, then I agree.
But from a much wider public interest perspective, I think it is also important to sort out whether TiVo's DVR technology is one the only, and whether there can be other DVR technologies that can compete in the DVR business
Even if E* wins on appeal, E* and TiVo can still settle and work together, this kind of things happen often.
Look, all cases to the US Supreme Court (except for a really really small minority) arrive as certiorari petitions,and the Supremes have total discretion as whether to hear the case. ALSO, in the last decade about 80 cases PER YEAR - out of 9,000 petitions per year - are granted, so it is true that the decision of almost any federal appellate court is likely to be the final one.
The Court of Appeals (of which the Federal Circuit is the only one with a national jurisdiction) operates on a very different principle. For most instances, there is a right as of appeal from a district court to a court of appeals. The COA has to hear the case -- what they don't have to do is give it a full dress treatment. i.e., as one of the other posts mentioned, the question is whether they say it is a frivolous appeal (that is basically the major discretion they have). Is it likely to happen given the stakes of this case, I don't think so.
Now as far as federal circuit cases being accepted on cert, I just checked the U.S. Supreme Court database, and queried every case from the 1997 - 2007 terms, and in that there were 27 cases that came from the federal circuit; for an average of 2-3 cases PER YEAR, approximately 3% of the annual Supreme Court caseload. Source for the online version of the database is: The Supreme Court Database
That database does not provide info on the number of cert petitions, just cases heard.
E* doesn't seem too concerned about D*, even though they have more subs and possibly DVR users than E*!
I guess the 'justice' is selective at best...
DIRECTV and TiVo have an agreement. TiVo has agreed not to sue DIRECTV for so many years. With the purchase of replayTV DIRECTV also likely has patents that could be used against TiVo. DIRECTV DVRs could infringe on the TiVo patent but since TiVo has agreed not to sue them since they are working together they are licensed to use the patent in a round about way.
So its basically just a setup and a scam. Nice.
...And justice for all...
God help us. This system of ours couldn't get more corrupt.
"A full dress treatment" is a better description. Unlike the Supreme Court, the appeals court does not simply reject a request for review without comment. I have read a few where the appeals court simply declined the review due to lack of jurisdiction. Though I have never seen the term "frivolous appeal" used. I guess if a party decides to appeal a decision to the appeals court knowing the appeals court has no jurisdiction over such issue, one can call it a frivolous appeal.
Even in those cases the appeals court still explained in detail why they did not have jurisdiction over such issues.
Ok I thought we were talking about this Federal Circuit, not other Circuit Court and not criminal cases either.
Does matter what brand of fertilizer, it all comes from the same horse.
Look, we know you think the legal issues we are discussing are "horse sh*t" but apparently most of us like to discuss such legal issues, so I don't know if it is necessary to remind us time after time we are discussing horse sh*t.
DISH NETWORK CORPORATION, ET. AL,
Plaintiffs.
v.
TIVO INC.,
Defendant.
§
CV 2:09 CV 171 (TJW)
ORDER
The above styled case is hereby transferred to the docket of Judge David Folsom.
Signed this 19th day of June, 2009
T. John Ward
United States District Judge
Plaintiffs.
v.
TIVO INC.,
Defendant.
§
CV 2:09 CV 171 (TJW)
ORDER
The above styled case is hereby transferred to the docket of Judge David Folsom.
Signed this 19th day of June, 2009
T. John Ward
United States District Judge
That is the DISH case against TIVO not the TIVO case vs. DISH.
Two different cases. Don't muddle it and confuse people. Please.
If Folsom can't be objective then he should be removed from this case.
Not surprising. It will be interesting to see if Judge Folsom will simply dismiss this case while the same issue is pending appeal.
Of course if he dismisses this case E* will appeal so I guess the appeals court may review both cases at the same time?
Of course if he dismisses this case E* will appeal so I guess the appeals court may review both cases at the same time?
I gave you an example that appellate courts can dismiss appeals for being frivolous; and it does not matter if it is the Federal Circuit or the 6th Circuit or 9th circuit; just basic judicial process.
A court can dismiss a case for being frivolous. That's all I was saying.
That will certainly be grounds for an appeal.
I can't believe they transferred it to him (actually, I can).
- Status
