TIVO vs E*

[CuriousMark]

Oh fiddlesticks. A scorched earth policy would have Charlie buying out Tivo, canning everyone who was ever associated with the firm, and then turning around and suing everybody else for patent infringement.

That is an expensive scorched earth policy. Ex Parte re-examination is a cheap one.

 

[vampz26]

Has it occurred to any of the squeally fanboys out there that if Tivos patent was 'bulletproof' this whole trial circus would be over and this discussion irrelevant?

One could argue that this trial did less to strengthen tivos claim, and more to expose holes in it.

Let's face it, tivo's claim to a patent has been disputable from the very beginning. Its only a metter of time...

 

[Curtis0620]

Has it occurred to any of the squeally fanboys out there that if Tivos patent was 'bulletproof' this whole trial circus would be over and this discussion irrelevant?

One could argue that this trial did less to strengthen tivos claim, and more to expose holes in it.

Let's face it, tivo's claim to a patent has been disputable from the very beginning. Its only a metter of time...

Yes, our court system has always been super speedy, you squeally fanboy you..

 

[Richard Cranium]

It is not a lie, it is a joke! (You misspelled "breath".)

A joke is a lie? I don't get it...

 

[jacmyoung]

To recap:



What really amuses me, and to be honest, concerns me to an extent, is the absolute utter and complete lack of command of the English language that your post illustrates. Ok, fine it's one thing to mis-type "breath" and maybe I shouldn't have been a smart-ass to call you on it (but, in fairness to me, I thought it was hilarious).

But how can you "say for sure" that it is a "total lie?" What does "I'm holding my width" even mean? Seriously, if you take that position about a completely made up sentence that has no meaning in the English language, how can anyone take anything you say seriously. Don't get me wrong, nobody does take you seriously about anything you post, but this is over the top. It's the classic illustration of the old saw "better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you're a fool then open it and remove all doubt."

Doubt has left the building. Thank you, and good night.

I know perfectly what that phrase means, thank you.

Again you cannot face the facts, each and every assertions you made was refuted by me, all you can do is trying to attack my English and spelling mistake.

You lied about your holding breadth, I said so because that is the only kind of language you could understand. You have no ability to read the law, the metaphor, the "on alternative" argument...So the only way to respond to you is to make a stupid joke.

Because your rants have been just about at that level, what else can I do?

You never saw me making such low grade jokes with Thomas22, or Greg, or CuriousMark, did you?

 

[Richard Cranium]

Has it occurred to any of the squeally fanboys out there that if Tivos patent was 'bulletproof' this whole trial circus would be over and this discussion irrelevant? .

While I'm not a "squeally fanboy" the trial IS over. Tivo won $105 million and going after another $200 million in damages. "There are no more trials circuses", just waiting for a judge to find Charlie in contempt, order him to shut all his DVR's off and fork over the rest of the money he owes.

The sad part is Charlie could have settled for $1.50 a box that he already tacked on to his customers but decided to be "stubborn". Now it's going to cost him $5.00 a box.

Hardly irrelevant IMO.

One could argue that this trial did less to strengthen tivos claim, and more to expose holes in it. .

Once again, Charlie already tried this and failed miserably. Tivo's patents were re-examined and upheld as is (not one single word was changed) making them stronger then they were at trial.

One can argue that Charlie actually made their patents bulletproof.

 

[jacmyoung]

Has it occurred to any of the squeally fanboys out there that if Tivos patent was 'bulletproof' this whole trial circus would be over and this discussion irrelevant?

One could argue that this trial did less to strengthen tivos claim, and more to expose holes in it.

Let's face it, tivo's claim to a patent has been disputable from the very beginning. Its only a metter of time...

Speaking of holes, this second reexamination is a clear example of those holes.

I asked Nobody99 to show us the link to his "stats" about the second reexamination assertion, he could not provide one. There is no such stats by the USPTO, because it is not usual to have such second reexamination on the same patent claims, by the same USPTO.

The reason we have one now, as the USPTO stated themselves, is becasue the same USPTO failed to do their job during the last reexamination, by failing to combine the two prior patents.

Now they are essentially saying they will correct that failure from the last time. That is of course not to say they will invalidate the two software claims this time, only that the reason for such attempt is a very compelling one.

 

[CuriousMark]

Let's first clarify one thing, the reason we are even talking about this new lawsuit is an admission that TiVo might fail on the contempt issue, why? Because if E* is in contempt, this new suit will likely be moot. So let's put things in perspective. For a very long time, TiVo folks talked about why E* was in contempt on the face, new design or not, to today talking about the new case may be many years from now, that is a huge change of attitude already

Changing the subject is no way to answer. The re-examination will go on long after the current litigation, which is contempt litigation, is over. I did not mention a new trial, you are bringing that in, right out of nowhere, at least with respect to my comment. So don't go putting words in my mouth that were not written. I am not talking about a new case.

The reason for the double talk is because I was right, a contempt ruling, once final, of course can be appealed, that was the only point.

{The aftermath of such an appeal}

That is of course a different point. While it is possible the appeals court may not stay the order, most times the orders are stayed pending appeal. But like you said, we will have to wait and see. But let's not hold our breadth on this one, it may never come to that at all, if you know what I mean.

That different point is the one you were responding to from Richard, he just didn't formulate it very well. No one is holding their breath, although I believe Dish is likely to need that appeal.

But let's not talk about some preliminary injunction, there is no such thing here.

From what I have seen, there indeed could be one. Don't rule it out, out of hand, simply because you wouldn't want to see one.

Not "good reason" but "substantial new question." Had the examiner looked over it the first time thoroughly, it is possible we would not be here talking at all.

My point is that the question is in fact not that NEW. The wording you are hanging your hat on is simply pro-forma for the Ex Parte request. Don't read much more into it, it is a reformulation of an old question that is made new by virtue of requesting it be looked at in a different way than it was the first time. However, if it makes you and Dish subscribers more comfortable to think those words are a star treck energy shield, go for it.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Changing the subject is no way to answer. The re-examination will go on long after the current litigation, which is contempt litigation, is over. I did not mention a new trial, you are bringing that in, right out of nowhere, at least with respect to my comment. So don't go putting words in my mouth that were not written. I am not talking about a new case.

Anyone with the money can request a re-examination of ANY PATENT.

The USPTO is happy to cash the check and that's all they are going to do. The patents have already been validated (thanks to Charlie and his money) and will stay that way.

NOT ONE SINGLE WORD HAS BEEN CHANGED ANYWHERE!

The patents are bulletproof. The re-re-examination is irrelevant to the contempt proceedings and by the time the USPTO is done taking Charlie for every penny they can get out of him will re-re-validate the patents as is.

And then Charlie will probably spend even more money on a re-re-re- examination stating that the patent is so obvious that it only took him 4 years and 3 tries to find the proof of how obvious the patents are.

 

[CuriousMark]

Has it occurred to any of the squeally fanboys out there that if Tivos patent was 'bulletproof' this whole trial circus would be over and this discussion irrelevant?

One could argue that this trial did less to strengthen tivos claim, and more to expose holes in it.

Let's face it, tivo's claim to a patent has been disputable from the very beginning. Its only a metter of time...

There is no such thing as a 'bulletproof' patent. This has gone on because Dish has the resources and will to fight it. Even if the patent is extremely strong, possibly even verging on bulletproof, a defendant willing to spend the time and money can string things out as long as they please. This says more about Dish's litigation strategies overall than it says about the strength of TiVo's patent.

It is only a matter of time, but I doubt it is as clear as to which way it goes as you seem to think. That's OK, it is an interesting and entertaining ride.

 

[Richard Cranium]

Does anyone have a guess as to how long the DE Judge thinks he has to wait before he drops the case?

What's a fashionable amount of time to wait so it looks like he thought it over carefully?

 

[Richard Cranium]

There is no such thing as a 'bulletproof' patent. This has gone on because Dish has the resources and will to fight it. Even if the patent is extremely strong, possibly even verging on bulletproof, a defendant willing to spend the time and money can string things out as long as they please.

The longer it drags out the better it is for Tivo. The patents are bulletproof and will stay that way, as far as the Judges in TX and DE are concerned, until Charlie stops paying and drops the whole charade.

Charlie will be paying $5.00 a box long before the results of the re-re-examination come into play.

I'll say it again, the re-re-examination is a non issue.

 

[jacmyoung]

Changing the subject is no way to answer. The re-examination will go on long after the current litigation, which is contempt litigation, is over. I did not mention a new trial, you are bringing that in, right out of nowhere, at least with respect to my comment. So don't go putting words in my mouth that were not written. I am not talking about a new case.

Of course the whole debate in the last few days were two parts, one is this reexamination, and the other is this new DE suit.

Neither of these two items is prepared for this contempt proceeding, nor for this current litigation pending in the TX court, therefore for you, and your other fellow TiVo supporters to even try to link the above two to the current contempt proceeding is a total lack of the understanding of the whole thing.

E* prepared for both the new DE action on 5/30/08, and this reeexamination on 11/10/08, for future litigations, after a no contempt. If you can finally understand that!

That different point is the one you were responding to from Richard, he just didn't formulate it very well.

Please do not try to speak for him, he had no idea about whether a contempt ruling can be appealed or not.

No one is holding their breath, although I believe Dish is likely to need that appeal.

Again please do not try to speak for Nobody99.

From what I have seen, there indeed could be one. Don't rule it out, out of hand, simply because you wouldn't want to see one.

There is no "preliminary injunction" in this litigation, this much is a fact, wishing for one all you want. A permanent injunction had been issued, you cannot have a preliminary injunction after a permenent injunction, on the same issue, it does not work that way.

My point is that the question is in fact not that NEW. The wording you are hanging your hat on is simply pro-forma for the Ex Parte request. Don't read much more into it, it is a reformulation of an old question that is made new by virtue of requesting it be looked at in a different way than it was the first time. However, if it makes you and Dish subscribers more comfortable to think those words are a star treck energy shield, go for it.

Of course the TiVo folks like to think it is nothing, that is fine, they have been in that thinking mode for over a year now if that makes you feel more comfortable, so be it.

But this much is a fact, I did not say it, the USPTO said it, they did not combine the two prior art during the last reexamination, and they will do so this time. There is a clear distinction, you just want to ignore it.

 

[Thomas22]

Judge Folsom knew that the time to question the validity of TiVo's patent has passed. Questions of patent validity are irrelevant.

the parties shall be precluded from presenting evidence or argument concerning the validity of the ’389 Patent at the upcoming hearing.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

[jacmyoung]

Judge Folsom knew that the time to question the validity of TiVo's patent has passed. Questions of patent validity are irrelevant.

Irrelevant only to the current proceeding, not to any future litigations, for example this new DE case.

That is why I have been saying over and over, E* prepared for this new DE case, and the reexamination, for the event that there is no contempt, if so, TiVo will have to fight the fight in a new litigation, which will be this new E* case.

When that new litigation finally gets under way two to three years from now, the reexamination, if in E*'s favor, will have a profound impact, if not a determining one.

The TiVo folks continue to fail to understand the strategy, therefore continue to try to link the above two things to this contempt proceeding, I hope it is clear to them by now, finally!

 

[Thomas22]

Irrelevant only to the current proceeding, not to any future litigations

Nope. Totally irrelevant also to the upcoming contempt hearing for the ViP models.

 

[nobody99]

I know perfectly what that phrase means, thank you.

This remind me of one of my favorite Seinfeld episodes. Jerry's going in to rent a car, and they have none left. He says he has a reservation, so they obviously have a car for him. The rental car lady says "I know what a reservation is, sir" to which Jerry responds, "no I don't think you do."

So, jacmyoung, when you say "I know perfectly what that phrase means", uh, no, I don't think you do.

So, a simple question, please explain to me what "I'm holding my width" means.

Again you cannot face the facts, each and every assertions you made was refuted by me, all you can do is trying to attack my English and spelling mistake.

Actually, I was doing two things. Refuting all the made up stuff you keep presenting, AND attacking your English and spelling mistake. So it was dual-purpose.

You lied about your holding breadth, I said so because that is the only kind of language you could understand.

Wow, reallly? Again? I never said anything about holding my "breadth." I said I was holding my "width." So please, again, explain to me what "I'm holding my width" means. Just so we're clear, I said it, and even I don't know what it means. I find it extraordinary that you both understand what it means AND that I'm lying about it.

You have no ability to read the law, the metaphor, the "on alternative" argument...So the only way to respond to you is to make a stupid joke.

Wait, I'm confused. If it was "a stupid joke" how could you know exactly what it means, and how could it be a lie? And, for what it's worth, it was not a stupid joke. It was a knee-slapper. It was hysterically funny. I'm sure if we took a poll most people would say they got a chuckle out of it. I was quite proud of my quick wit.

Because your rants have been just about at that level, what else can I do?

Oh, I can think of lots of things you can do. I'll leave that to your imagination.

You never saw me making such low grade jokes with Thomas22, or Greg, or CuriousMark, did you?

You give me a lot of raw material to work with. It's almost like stealing candy from a baby you make it so easy. The other three you mention don't make fools of themselves.

 

[jacmyoung]

Nope. Totally irrelevant also to the upcoming contempt hearing for the ViP models.

You wish

To even get to that point, there has to be a contempt on the current 8 named DVRs first.

You do not hear TiVo talking about any "new" DVRs lately, do you? TiVo did make a mention of it on 9/4, but quickly abandoned it, for good reasons.

First thing first.

 

[jacmyoung]

This remind me of one of my favorite Seinfeld episodes. Jerry's going in to rent a car, and they have none left. He says he has a reservation, so they obviously have a car for him. The rental car lady says "I know what a reservation is, sir" to which Jerry responds, "no I don't think you do."

So, jacmyoung, when you say "I know perfectly what that phrase means", uh, no, I don't think you do.

So, a simple question, please explain to me what "I'm holding my width" means.

Actually, I was doing two things. Refuting all the made up stuff you keep presenting, AND attacking your English and spelling mistake. So it was dual-purpose.



Wow, reallly? Again? I never said anything about holding my "breadth." I said I was holding my "width." So please, again, explain to me what "I'm holding my width" means. Just so we're clear, I said it, and even I don't know what it means. I find it extraordinary that you both understand what it means AND that I'm lying about it.



Wait, I'm confused. If it was "a stupid joke" how could you know exactly what it means, and how could it be a lie? And, for what it's worth, it was not a stupid joke. It was a knee-slapper. It was hysterically funny. I'm sure if we took a poll most people would say they got a chuckle out of it. I was quite proud of my quick wit.



Oh, I can think of lots of things you can do. I'll leave that to your imagination.



You give me a lot of raw material to work with. It's almost like stealing candy from a baby you make it so easy. The other three you mention don't make fools of themselves.

It was a stupid joke for you because a stupid joke was the only thing I thought you would understand, apparently you failed on that one too

 

[jacmyoung]

Look, there is a lot of talk about what TiVo will do, or what TiVo might do in the future. You guys do not hear me talking what E* will do or might do in the future, rather what E* did, and why.

The reason the TiVo folks can only talk about what might happen in the future is because TiVo had nothing to show for in the past year The TiVo folks can't talk about anything TiVo did in the past year regarding this contempt proceeding, it is downright embarrassing