TIVO vs E*

[isaac newton]

I believe that if if somebody builds a better mousetrap, thats just as good as inventing a better mousetrap. Here is what Tivo 'invented', now someone invented something better. Tivo is trying to say its the same thing, and thats what this whole bloody courtroom nonsense is about.

How many centuries do you think that train of logic would set back the industrial revolution, the concept of innovation or any product that costs more than a few bucks to develop? Imagine a world in which there are no pharmaceutical companies - it costs gajillions to discover new drugs; there would be no high tech industry, no computers, certainly no internet, no telephones, no cellphones, electronic devices of any kind, microwave ovens, I could go on forever. The patent system, as dysfunctional as it is, is the only protection, for a short time, for people and companies to invest huge sums of money or time to invent new things.

The first industrial democracy that ever created a patent system is now the world power, built on innovation and productivity that dwarfs other democracies and other forms of government that existed for centuries before the US was ever born. Isn't that the travesty here?

You need to think through the consequences of your idea. All E* had to do, and it would have been far, far cheaper, was to pay Tivo some chump change to either buy a license, make some deal, perhaps even buy Tivo itself for a fraction of what this may end up costing. Isn't that the travesty here?

 

[ts7]

Come on, folks - it's one thing to refute someone's statement with opposing facts, but is it really necessary to attack the individual doing the posting?

Enough with the personal attacks already!!!!

Save this stuff for the War Zone!

 

[ts7]

All E* had to do, and it would have been far, far cheaper, was to pay Tivo some chump change to either buy a license, make some deal, perhaps even buy Tivo itself for a fraction of what this may end up costing. Isn't that the travesty here?

As I recall, many on this list felt many of TiVo's patents were obvious and never should have been awarded in the first place. I believe E* made this same argument and appealed to the USPTO for re-examination, but lost. Some believe the USPTO was right on, others believe the patent was granted by and reaffirmed by technologically illiterate bureaucrats. My guess is the truth is somewhere in the middle, but the patent stands, none the less.

Yes, I would tend to agree that AT THAT POINT E* should have settled up with TiVo, but by that time I believe TiVo was already posturing for extensive damages in which case E* made the calculated decision to fight the infringement claims in court.

In the end, as many have speculated previously, Charlie will end up buying TiVo and/or TiVo will go out of business because of Internet TV or more innovative technology that does NOT use any of their patents. In the mean time, the drama continues.

 

[vampz26]

The law does not allow that. If someone invents a "moustrap" and gets a patent, and a later person invents a "better moustrap" but that better one contains all the steps of the first "moustrap," then the later "better mousetrap" has infringed the first one, even if the later person did not even know that the first "mousetrap" ever existed.

The law appears unfair, but it is a sacrifice of the right of the later person, for the good of the society, the reason is, if there is no such right granted to the first person to refuse to disallow the later person to infringe, then nobody will want to disclose their inventions, because there is no incentive to do so.

When that happens, everyone will just keep his invention to himself, as trade secret. And the socieaty does not benefit if no one knows what good ideas the other person has come up with.

The patent system encourages the first inventor to disclose his idea, rather for him to keep it a secret, in exchange, the patent law grant him a special right, to refuse the next person from infringing on his invention, even if the next person might be a "better inventor."

Correction: The law neither allows or disallows that...

I just acts as a mediator in these types of things. In general, it only comes down to an opinion of someone who probably as more power than they deserve...

 

[vampz26]

How many centuries do you think that train of logic would set back the industrial revolution, the concept of innovation or any product that costs more than a few bucks to develop? Imagine a world in which there are no pharmaceutical companies - it costs gajillions to discover new drugs; there would be no high tech industry, no computers, certainly no internet, no telephones, no cellphones, electronic devices of any kind, microwave ovens, I could go on forever. The patent system, as dysfunctional as it is, is the only protection, for a short time, for people and companies to invest huge sums of money or time to invent new things.

The first industrial democracy that ever created a patent system is now the world power, built on innovation and productivity that dwarfs other democracies and other forms of government that existed for centuries before the US was ever born. Isn't that the travesty here?

You need to think through the consequences of your idea. All E* had to do, and it would have been far, far cheaper, was to pay Tivo some chump change to either buy a license, make some deal, perhaps even buy Tivo itself for a fraction of what this may end up costing. Isn't that the travesty here?

I think we've witnessedt he triumphant return of Richard Cranium...

Dude...you have no FRICKIN' clue what you are talking about...

My train of logic is the REASON for the industrial reason. The REASON that a competitive market is what build the country and the REASON that it is as great as it is! THIS COUNTRY IS GREAT BECAUSE OF INNOVATION THROUGH COMPETITION! Not stifling competition thru ridiculous courtroom antics...

You have just exposed the truth behind why the patent system is inherently flawed. You just said it yourself when you brought up the industrial revolution! The patent system was formalized by the wealthy for the wealthy around the time of the industrial revolution! It had nothing to DO with innovation or anything. It was a tool of the wealthy to remain wealthy by stifling the competition!! Because lets face it, thats all its good for. Just like E* inventing a better DVR, Tivo claiming to own it hurts innovation, and worse...if I built a better DVR...Tivo could steal it from me and I couldn't even fight them! I can't afford too! Therefore...what rewards does my innovation hold for me? Get it now? Good...

lol...you have no idea how your attempt to sound eloquent and sharp landed your foot right in your proverbial mouth. I have to admit, I got great pleasure in helping you put it there...

 

[TheKrell]

In the end, as many have speculated previously, Charlie will end up buying TiVo and/or TiVo will go out of business because of Internet TV or more innovative technology that does NOT use any of their patents.

Or rather, the same things claimed by Tivo in their patents will go on out of sight inside our PCs, laptops, or portable media players, running 100% in proprietary software, and costing just a few $'s or bundled "free" with DVB-S, -C, and -T tuners, or Hava and Sling boxes.

 

[isaac newton]

I think we've witnessed the triumphant return of Richard Cranium...

Dude...you have no FRICKIN' clue what you are talking about...

My train of logic is the REASON for the industrial reason. The REASON that a competitive market is what build the country and the REASON that it is as great as it is! THIS COUNTRY IS GREAT BECAUSE OF INNOVATION THROUGH COMPETITION! Not stifling competition thru ridiculous courtroom antics...

You have just exposed the truth behind why the patent system is inherently flawed. You just said it yourself when you brought up the industrial revolution! The patent system was formalized by the wealthy for the wealthy around the time of the industrial revolution! It had nothing to DO with innovation or anything. It was a tool of the wealthy to remain wealthy by stifling the competition!! Because lets face it, thats all its good for. Just like E* inventing a better DVR, Tivo claiming to own it hurts innovation, and worse...if I built a better DVR...Tivo could steal it from me and I couldn't even fight them! I can't afford too! Therefore...what rewards does my innovation hold for me? Get it now? Good...

lol...you have no idea how your attempt to sound eloquent and sharp landed your foot right in your proverbial mouth. I have to admit, I got great pleasure in helping you put it there...

I have to admit, that's an unmeasured response. First of all, I am not dickhead and I don't subscribe to his posts.

I don't know what the "industrial reason" is. I assume you meant "built", not "build". Are you an alcoholic?

So your argument is based on the idea that Tivo is "wealthy", perhaps Jim Barton is "wealthy" and he is "using the patent system" to protect his wealth. That is probably the most perverse interpretation of what a successful inventor does in our capitalist system to invest millions or billions of dollars hoping, beyond hope, that they can accomplish something never done before. But your universe allows scavengers to say "I added the "BACK" button, so it's a totally new idea!", and steal decades of intellectual property. Wow.

You are either a communist or a French democrat, when's the last time you won an argument, the French are 0 and 12!

 

[vampz26]

I have to admit, that's an unmeasured response. First of all, I am not dickhead and I don't subscribe to his posts.

I don't know what the "industrial reason" is. I assume you meant "built", not "build". Are you an alcoholic?

So your argument is based on the idea that Tivo is "wealthy", perhaps Jim Barton is "wealthy" and he is "using the patent system" to protect his wealth. That is probably the most perverse interpretation of what a successful inventor does in our capitalist system to invest millions or billions of dollars hoping, beyond hope, that they can accomplish something never done before. But your universe allows scavengers to say "I added the "BACK" button, so it's a totally new idea!", and steal decades of intellectual property. Wow.

You are either a communist or a French democrat, when's the last time you won an argument, the French are 0 and 12!

LOL....you are done...your first argument was strictly using emotive language lacked substance....thus I refuted it....

Now you resort to personal attacks...sorry, your done...

anyway, I tend to have a lot of typos in my post because I'm dyslexic and cannot often proofread...sorry if it offends you.

And as for your additional emotive language? If you spend billions of dollars on a project, you need to KEEP spending...keep it marketable and current. Thats how it works...you see? Good...

You see, I'm all about competition and success thru innovation., thats hardly communism...you seem to be just the opposite. One Governing body, and everybody serve them. State sponsored innovation, not innivation driven by competition and market value...somehow that sounds more communist than anything I said...go figure...

And lastly, there is NOTHING that has never been done before...thats more of your emotive speech fallacy. Like someone else posted, the same thing a Tivo does your personal computer does too...lol...to add to the ridiculousness of it all...

 

[rockymtnhigh]

Mr. Newton - one and only warning; stop the attacks. You are new here (maybe), keep the discussion civil.

Vampz -- best bet, use the ignore button.

Everybody else - same rules apply. No more warnings about attacks. If you cannot discuss the issues civilly, don't discuss them at all.

I am calling it a night; if I see this thread has exploded over-night, there will be some vacations from access to this forum. Got it?

 

[isaac newton]

Mr. Newton - one and only warning; stop the attacks. You are new here (maybe), keep the discussion civil.

Vampz -- best bet, use the ignore button.

Everybody else - same rules apply. No more warnings about attacks. If you cannot discuss the issues civilly, don't discuss them at all.

I am calling it a night; if I see this thread has exploded over-night, there will be some vacations from access to this forum. Got it?

My apologies if you determined my response was personal. I am new here, and you certainly know from my IP, I'm not using a redirector.

I have simply tried to engage in a philosophic debate over the merits of the patent system, we seem to agree it's a seriously flawed system but for different reasons.

In my opinion, without attacking any specific contributor, to suggest that Tivo has not developed its' patented technology in numerous ways is either misinformed or ignorant. We can all name dozens and dozens of improvements that Tivo has added, and we can name dozens and dozens of ways that e* has built on the very same ideas.

So the argument seems to be that if Tivo doesn't launch satellites it's protected technology can be stolen because someone else does (launch satellies). Tivo has been proven to have invented an idea, someone must have done it first and the USPTO said it was Tivo, and others have taken that idea and done more.

All I'm saying is that anyone that thinks that "improving" an idea is equivalent to inventing a new idea is moronic. Here are 12 "new ideas" I have that would destroy corporate America based on that concept:
1. combine Lipitor with aspirin in one pill
2. take the entire iphone h/w and s/w design and make a curved form factor
3. combine radiation therapy with patented chemo-therapy drugs together
4. add a buttin on the car radio to "Tivo" the transmission
5. employ "push" technology for hotmail, yahoo mail, live mail, etc.
6. reduce 5 micron fabs with 3 microns fabs using finer laser etching
7. modify the Windows 7 source code to make curved windows
8. combine any two patented drugs that already have high volume sales
9. combine Tivo time-warp functions with satelite feeds
10. publish cartoons combining Bugs Bunny with Inspector Gadget
11. Add a "BACK" button to a TV control
12. Add any other button, like order Dominos Pizza, to a TV control

I could make a list of tens of milllions of "improvements" to existing US patents, the approval of any one would bring an immediate halt to each and every innovation in each and every labaratory in the country. To not see this or refute this is blind. Patents protect new ideas, not allow others to start fresh to make new products. It's a very simple concept, a pillar of the capitalist system.

 

[vampz26]

My apologies if you determined my response was personal. I am new here, and you certainly know from my IP, I'm not using a redirector.

I have simply tried to engage in a philosophic debate over the merits of the patent system, we seem to agree it's a seriously flawed system but for different reasons.

In my opinion, without attacking any specific contributor, to suggest that Tivo has not developed its' patented technology in numerous ways is either misinformed or ignorant. We can all name dozens and dozens of improvements that Tivo has added, and we can name dozens and dozens of ways that e* has built on the very same ideas.

So the argument seems to be that if Tivo doesn't launch satellites it's protected technology can be stolen because someone else does (launch satellies). Tivo has been proven to have invented an idea, someone must have done it first and the USPTO said it was Tivo, and others have taken that idea and done more.

All I'm saying is that anyone that thinks that "improving" an idea is equivalent to inventing a new idea is moronic. Here are 12 "new ideas" I have that would destroy corporate America based on that concept:
1. combine Lipitor with aspirin in one pill
2. take the entire iphone h/w and s/w design and make a curved form factor
3. combine radiation therapy with patented chemo-therapy drugs together
4. add a buttin on the car radio to "Tivo" the transmission
5. employ "push" technology for hotmail, yahoo mail, live mail, etc.
6. reduce 5 micron fabs with 3 microns fabs using finer laser etching
7. modify the Windows 7 source code to make curved windows
8. combine any two patented drugs that already have high volume sales
9. combine Tivo time-warp functions with satelite feeds
10. publish cartoons combining Bugs Bunny with Inspector Gadget
11. Add a "BACK" button to a TV control
12. Add any other button, like order Dominos Pizza, to a TV control

I could make a list of tens of milllions of "improvements" to existing US patents, the approval of any one would bring an immediate halt to each and every innovation in each and every labaratory in the country. To not see this or refute this is blind. Patents protect new ideas, not allow others to start fresh to make new products. It's a very simple concept, a pillar of the capitalist system.

“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.” LMAO....

I've got a better idea...how about a little self-reflection. And consider how your petty list of unrelated rhetoric adds nothing to discussion, and makes you look like a fool. Thats a better plan.

Meanwhile, I'll watch Reaper recorded off my ViP622. You know...E*s invention, while you can do some studying and learn what "Build a better mousetrap" actually means.

Now listen to Rocky...he gave you good advice "Richard"...we know its you...

 

[jacmyoung]

Correction: The law neither allows or disallows that...

What? The law neither allows or disallows infringement?

Do you know the purpose of an injucntion? To prevent continued infringement, because the law prohibits infringement.

You may say whether there is an infringement or not may be a matter of opinion, but the law prohibits infringement on a patent when the patent owner seeks such prohibition, that is a statement of fact, not opinion.

 

[ts7]

I have simply tried to engage in a philosophic debate over the merits of the patent system, we seem to agree it's a seriously flawed system but for different reasons.

This thread is about TiVo vs E*, though it would appear a sub-discussion about the USPTO has developed (maybe time for a new thread?)

So the argument seems to be that if Tivo doesn't launch satellites it's protected technology can be stolen because someone else does (launch satellies). Tivo has been proven to have invented an idea, someone must have done it first and the USPTO said it was Tivo, and others have taken that idea and done more.

Launching satellites has nothing to do with the discussion

I could make a list of tens of milllions of "improvements" to existing US patents, the approval of any one would bring an immediate halt to each and every innovation in each and every labaratory in the country. To not see this or refute this is blind. Patents protect new ideas, not allow others to start fresh to make new products. It's a very simple concept, a pillar of the capitalist system.

Correct, but when a company uses its patents to stifle innovation or otherwise deprive society of common good, then it is abusing the patent system. Some in this thread would argue that this is the intent, or at least the result of TiVo's legal maneuvering and that E* is the true "victim" in this situation.

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting E* is a victim! Charlie is as responsible for this current mess as is TiVo, but it would seem that TiVo is more interested in milking license fees and dragging this out in court than in innovation. As others have pointed out, if TiVo and E* would work together imagine the dynamite product we might have!

 

[jacmyoung]

...Tivo has been proven to have invented an idea, someone must have done it first and the USPTO said it was Tivo, and others have taken that idea and done more...

If you mean TiVo was the first to invent the DVR, no, they did not, many before TiVo made working DVRs and have patents before TiVo, TiVo took the ideas and did more, and the more they did to the DVR field contributed to a more efficient use of the CPU power in a DVR, and as a result, they got the patent for such invention.

This much was admitted by TiVo BTW, TiVo said at the trial, there were many DVR technologies, TiVo's was only one of them.

 

[vampz26]

What? The law neither allows or disallows infringement?

Do you know the purpose of an injucntion? To prevent continued infringement, because the law prohibits infringement.

You may say whether there is an infringement or not may be a matter of opinion, but the law prohibits infringement on a patent when the patent owner seeks such prohibition, that is a statement of fact, not opinion.

You never used the term 'infringement' in the post I was replying too...

You are playing your little word games again...this time using 'substitution'...

Now go back and read the post I replied to and what I said...and then make an intelligent reply.

 

[vampz26]

If you mean TiVo was the first to invent the DVR, no, they did not, many before TiVo made working DVRs and have patents before TiVo, TiVo took the ideas and did more, and the more they did to the DVR field contributed to a more efficient use of the CPU power in a DVR, and as a result, they got the patent for such invention.

This much was admitted by TiVo BTW, TiVo said at the trial, there were many DVR technologies, TiVo's was only one of them.

So was E*'s , but apparently its only ok for Tivo to 'steal'...lmao...

 

[Thomas22]

it would seem that TiVo is more interested in milking license fees and dragging this out in court than in innovation.

Yep. Those lazy, shiftless inventors aren't inventive enough. Let's just run roughshod over them until they invent some more. Meanwhile, let's reward anyone that infringes. Yeah, that'll teach those lazy inventors.

 

[vampz26]

reward the inventors with their windfall.

reward the innovater with continued success.

if they are one in the same, the market succeeded in rewarding the worthy.

if the inventor failed to be worthy of long term success, its their own fault for not innovating their invention, its their own dang fault.

sorry...

 

[CuriousMark]

Hey, you can't support your weak point here by taking the moral highground. At the end of the day, business is business...a good idea is one thing, and a better idea is another, but to stifle the better idea for lack of innovation on your own part? Well now...

Except for the real fact that what you suggest is NOT what is going on here. You didn't read my post to you on the subject? Or you simply ignore those facts. TiVo is innovative, very innovative. TiVo is not stifling Dish, or Comcast, or DTV. As a matter of fact DTV is innovating with DLNA, something neither Dish nor TiVo are currently doing. TiVo is innovating with community based searching, downloads and streaming, things neither DTV, Dish nor Comcast are doing. TiVo is not preventing them from doing these things, they have not prevented Roku from competing in that space.

You are simply wrong about that. Thus the conclusions you have reached are also suspect. This additional patent is simply a sign that innovation was going on in 2002 long before the first hint of a lawsuit was even an inkling in anyone's mind. There are new patent applications happening since then, things that indicate that innovation is still ongoing.

If anyone is stifling innovation it is Dish. They are showing that deep pockets companies can steal an innovation anytime they like thus removing the incentive for smaller companies to want to innovate in the first place.

 

[vampz26]

Except for the real fact that what you suggest is NOT what is going on here. You didn't read my post to you on the subject? Or you simply ignore those facts. TiVo is innovative, very innovative. TiVo is not stifling Dish, or Comcast, or DTV. As a matter of fact DTV is innovating with DLNA, something neither Dish nor TiVo are currently doing. TiVo is innovating with community based searching, downloads and streaming, things neither DTV, Dish nor Comcast are doing. TiVo is not preventing them from doing these things, they have not prevented Roku from competing in that space.

You are simply wrong about that. Thus the conclusions you have reached are also suspect. This additional patent is simply a sign that innovation was going on in 2002 long before the first hint of a lawsuit was even an inkling in anyone's mind. There are new patent applications happening since then, things that indicate that innovation is still ongoing.

If anyone is stifling innovation it is Dish. They are showing that deep pockets companies can steal an innovation anytime they like thus removing the incentive for smaller companies to want to innovate in the first place.

Not true...

waste words all you want, the fact remains.

E* is the only real threat, so E* is the only one challenged. Tivo can't afford to go after Roku or anyone else...so they go after the top contender. Take out the king of the hood, then you become the king of the hood. Thats the game Tivo is playing to stifle innovation.

as for Dish stifling competition? Please....Dish only cares about Dish...let others do what they will...thats just more rationalizing from the Tivo peanut gallery....

Tivo are the crooks here...nobody else...