TIVO vs E*

[CuriousMark]

In many ways I think TiVo ends up as the big loser here, as Dish has been doing some amazing innovation with its NEWEST receiver the 922. You add Sling capability to a box, and its a totally different ball-game; and plus, Echostar is marketing that to cable providers too.

TiVo could bring some big things to the table with Dish as they are with Cable. Things that complement sling. If the two were to work together they could all be winners.

 

[Greg Bimson]

As you say, I agree that the first thing Dish would do is make a mass swap out of the remaining offending receivers in service with Vip mpeg4 receivers. And then a whole new realm of litigation would start over whether the Vip series are offending; and the circle would begin again.

Not necessarily. TiVo only has to file another motion, for contempt of an injunction against infringements.

When the motion is filed, they can simply attach past case law and past evidence to show the court the comparasion that the ViP series isn't much different than the infringing series as it relates to the Software Claims. You know, the old "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck". DISH/SATS would have to refute that motion with their argument that the ViP's do a Time Warp process differently than their infringing counterparts.

In many ways I think TiVo ends up as the big loser here, as Dish has been doing some amazing innovation with its NEWEST receiver the 922. You add Sling capability to a box, and its a totally different ball-game; and plus, Echostar is marketing that to cable providers too.

This is tongue-in-cheek...

Amazing innovation is combining existing products to form a new product? So TiVo (and their Time Warp patent) is an amazing innovation?

But let us remember, if the 922 follows the same processes as a 942, it doesn't matter how Sling capability works, as it is being added to a box that has been ruled infringing (the 942).

 

[Rey]

There is no way on earth Dish is going to allow its DVR features to be shut-down. Its one thing to allow a local affiliate to go dark due to a failed contract negotiation; it is entirely a different thing to impact ALL subscribers to DVR receivers. There is no way it will ever happen. Ever.

And for those who received distant networks because there was no local coverage, Dish DID NOT leave them in the cold; that was the whole point of the ADD service.

:up:up
Charlie Will do what it takes to keep those dvr's on...... No one should be worrying about this

 

[nelson61]

As you say, I agree that the first thing Dish would do is make a mass swap out of the remaining offending receivers in service with Vip mpeg4 receivers..

All 4 million + of the infringing receivers at $200 a pop. I think not.

 

[CuriousMark]

All 4 million + of the infringing receivers at $200 a pop. I think not.

That 4 million number is years old. It has to be substantially less now. I have no idea how much less, but I am sure many of those people have upgraded over the last two years.

Still, your point is good that doing so is enormously expensive.

A deal is hopefully in the works.

 

[klegg]

The shutoff will have to be immediate, and the restoring of some form of limited DVR workaround will take some time to be cleared by the court, but yes I see it as a real possibility too. Dish has shown that using the subscriber base as a weapon can be made to work, at least in the medium term. I personally think that doing so, is not in Dish's best long term interests, it might stem the customer loss, but certainly would not eliminate it. Not being able to offer full up DVR service would also make it harder to attract new subscribers. Still, I can see Dish doing this. I also think it is not in the interest of subscribers, but they are on their own here, just as they were over the ADD issue you mentioned in the top of your post.

I think you are assuming there are a lot of Tivo-fanboys out there. Most people I know think the whole Tivo and it's over-inflated monthly fees for the "right" to record TV without providing much else has been exposed as a scam. Don't get me wrong, I like the "trick play" function, but I watch MOST of my DVR events after the fact. I can live with that.

Here's hoping that this "scammer" gets his...

 

[Martin Tupper]

As you say, I agree that the first thing Dish would do is make a mass swap out of the remaining offending receivers in service with Vip mpeg4 receivers. And then a whole new realm of litigation would start over whether the Vip series are offending; and the circle would begin again.

In many ways I think TiVo ends up as the big loser here, as Dish has been doing some amazing innovation with its NEWEST receiver the 922. You add Sling capability to a box, and its a totally different ball-game; and plus, Echostar is marketing that to cable providers too.

If after being forced by the courts to turn off the DVR functionality of the named devices, E* still does not sign a long-term licensing agreement, then TiVo's next move will be to file another contempt motion, charging that (all) other E* DVR models using the same software are not more than colorably different than the named infringing models.

Even if E* could replace all (except ~190k) of the named devices in 30 days, they still aren't out of the woods. TiVo doesn't have to go back to square one. They just need to establish that the software in the other models is not more than colorably different than the software in the named models, with respect to TiVo's patents.

Imagine a scenario where E* is forced to turn off every box that TiVo has challenged, and TiVo turns around and challenges the rest of them...as a continuation of the same trial...based on the same findings...to the same judge. The expanded injuction would not be years away...just months. That would NOT be good for E*.

 

[Hall]

At this point, any DVR that Dish offers will be considered "infringing" as far as TiVo is concerned. Rest assured, when they file to include the receivers developed since the original lawsuit, all of the ViPs as well as the 922 will be included. As Greg quoted, "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck" (replace 'duck' with 'Dish DVR'), it will be included.

Not until Dish and TiVo get some sort of agreement will TiVo walk away.

 

[Hall]

There is no way on earth Dish is going to allow its DVR features to be shut-down.

People can't make such strong statements, nor shouldn't. Some people might believe it..... There are scenarios in which it *could* happen.

 

[Smith P.]

People can't make such strong statements, nor shouldn't. Some people might believe it..... There are scenarios in which it *could* happen.

And the company really close to that moment.

 

[rockymtnhigh]

At this point, any DVR that Dish offers will be considered "infringing" as far as TiVo is concerned. Rest assured, when they file to include the receivers developed since the original lawsuit, all of the ViPs as well as the 922 will be included. As Greg quoted, "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck" (replace 'duck' with 'Dish DVR'), it will be included.

Not until Dish and TiVo get some sort of agreement will TiVo walk away.

And that will entail more litigation, and more years will go by... I seriously do not see DVR functionality going away.

 

[Martin Tupper]

And that will entail more litigation, and more years will go by... I seriously do not see DVR functionality going away.

Again, not years, months. Just as TiVo convinced Judge Folsom that the work-around software was not more than colorably different than the infringing software with respects to the software claims, so too will they file a contempt motion to Judge Folsom arguing that the software in the un-named DVR's is not more than colorably different than the infringing software with respect to the software claims. And isn't there already testimony on the record from an E* expert saying the newer DVR's were running the same software?

If the stay is lifted, time will no longer be on E*'s side.

 

[Smith P.]

As I'm mentioned before - there is no way to avoid PID analysis/filtering as one of key part of the patent's invention. So any Dish DVR will carry the process forever.

 

[jacmyoung]

The shutoff will have to be immediate, and the restoring of some form of limited DVR workaround will take some time to be cleared by the court, but yes I see it as a real possibility too. Dish has shown that using the subscriber base as a weapon can be made to work, at least in the medium term.

The judge only ordered E* to inform him at the implementation stage, so in theory it can be done in a very short time through an emergency motion, for example having a turn around in 30 days, within the time allowed by the judge's own order. Keep in mind so far, E* still is on a 29-day clock, the clock stopped on the second day after the judge issued the order.

I personally think that doing so, is not in Dish's best long term interests

You might be shocked to hear me say this, this litigation has never been in the best interest for E* nor TiVo. I said many times they should have worked together from the beginning, it was E*'s fault to tell TiVo to take a hike back then.

But at some point it became an issue of whether TiVo should have a total monopoly on the DVR functionalities, I think that turning point was a year ago when E* declared the design around to the court. From that point, and from the consumer interest standpoint, it was a good thing E* insisted to get to the bottom of the issue.

I believe the design around will hold up at the appeals court level, but more importantly the public should hear the appeals court telling Judge Folsom he was wrong for saying his injunction could prevent any attempt to design around a patent, whether the design around was successful or not. The Court must send a clear message that he is wrong with that particular statement. To do so Charlie must go all the way, that is why I hope he does take the appeal all the way, even though I agree with you doing so may not be in the best interest of E* nor TiVo in the long run.

But the public must be told that design-around is the reason, and the only reason why we have a patent system in the first place, as long as such design around is not infringing.

 

[jacmyoung]

Correction, All American Direct-AAD, I used ADD in a previous post, thought it sounded odd. The company name is actually National Programming Service (NPS), providing distant network singals to E* subs under the trade name AAD.

 

[rockymtnhigh]

Not necessarily. TiVo only has to file another motion, for contempt of an injunction against infringements.

When the motion is filed, they can simply attach past case law and past evidence to show the court the comparasion that the ViP series isn't much different than the infringing series as it relates to the Software Claims. You know, the old "if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck". DISH/SATS would have to refute that motion with their argument that the ViP's do a Time Warp process differently than their infringing counterparts.This is tongue-in-cheek...

Amazing innovation is combining existing products to form a new product? So TiVo (and their Time Warp patent) is an amazing innovation?

But let us remember, if the 922 follows the same processes as a 942, it doesn't matter how Sling capability works, as it is being added to a box that has been ruled infringing (the 942).

I know it was tongue-in-cheek, but I have seen a working prototype of the 922; it is unlike any satellite receiver or dvr ever. Its more than just a receiver with a sling, that's just icing on the cake. This thing rocks. It is the killer app for tv.

And let us also remember that the 622 and 722 have not been ruled infringing, and the 922 comes out of that. Give it a break for once. I know you want there to be doom and gloom, but I am not buying it.

 

[rockymtnhigh]

Ok, guys, I am out of here for 24 hours.... don't kill each other, and remember, Iceberg is watching, and if you think I am a mean SOB, you don't know anything.

Seriously, give it a break, go outside, have some fun. Or go use that 722 or TiVo you all love so much. I'm heading to Six Flags to ride some coasters for the day.

 

[Smith P.]

We as customers for sure like to see civil solution what will keep our DVR working, but the company went to far and did cross the border.

 

[Greg Bimson]

And let us also remember that the 622 and 722 have not been ruled infringing, and the 922 comes out of that. Give it a break for once. I know you want there to be doom and gloom, but I am not buying it.

Well, at least I should provide the breakdown on these receivers:

When the 622 and 722 were released, it was somewhere around the trial in April, 2006. TiVo actually tried to attach those ViPs to the lawsuit, but were rebuffed, as the testimony and verdict had already been given.

The next mention came from DISH/SATS, the day the injunction became active, in full force and effect. DISH/SATS issued a letter stating they changed the software on the 622/722 and the named receivers. What reason was there to change the software in the ViP series? Occam's razor, as well as DISH/SATS admission that the new software doesn't infringe upon the TiVo patent. Which means that the software on the 622/722 most likely did infringe with the old software.

Now the new software on the named receivers has been found infringing. TiVo should go for the throat regarding the ViP series now, but any resolution would be a bit far off.

After all, TiVo truly doesn't want to pay for more expert hours to run the ViP through the wringer. But you can bet if TiVo doesn't get resolution through removal of the stay, that will be the next step.

 

[klegg]

Well, at least I should provide the breakdown on these receivers:

When the 622 and 722 were released, it was somewhere around the trial in April, 2006. TiVo actually tried to attach those ViPs to the lawsuit, but were rebuffed, as the testimony and verdict had already been given.

The next mention came from DISH/SATS, the day the injunction became active, in full force and effect. DISH/SATS issued a letter stating they changed the software on the 622/722 and the named receivers. What reason was there to change the software in the ViP series? Occam's razor, as well as DISH/SATS admission that the new software doesn't infringe upon the TiVo patent. Which means that the software on the 622/722 most likely did infringe with the old software.

Now the new software on the named receivers has been found infringing. TiVo should go for the throat regarding the ViP series now, but any resolution would be a bit far off.

After all, TiVo truly doesn't want to pay for more expert hours to run the ViP through the wringer. But you can bet if TiVo doesn't get resolution through removal of the stay, that will be the next step.

I wouldn't speculate on what their software does or how exactly it functions, but from my own experience, MY code can do function differently based on different equipment SOMETIMES. Not sure that's the case here, but just a small bit of info for you.