Tivo and E*. Talk about patent laws and the court system [Archive] - SonicBabble

benjamin franklin

June 7th, 2009, 11:28 PM

For this? Nah.

I do think that E* should end up paying whatever "damages" that they owe however.

Better that than turn off the DVRs and lose all of those subs

Here are the damages, roughly:
$104M originally awarded
$103M more just awarded, plus a little interest
$300M (at least) in imputed sanctions, plus interest
$2.25/DVR/month minimum forever = $200M per year

Charlie will never face this music. Tivo is owed it all. I expect Tivo will move to shut down 7 million DVRs, and Dish customers will be left stroking their impotent equipment.

msmith198025

June 8th, 2009, 05:51 AM

Do you have a link to the damages being imposed? Some of those do not sound correct

cybok0

June 8th, 2009, 06:31 AM

For this? Nah.

I do think that E* should end up paying whatever "damages" that they owe however.

Better that than turn off the DVRs and lose all of those subs

Turn them all off. Tivo is the king of DVRs.

Bob Haller

June 8th, 2009, 07:38 AM

Here are the damages, roughly:
$104M originally awarded
$103M more just awarded, plus a little interest
$300M (at least) in imputed sanctions, plus interest
$2.25/DVR/month minimum forever = $200M per year

Charlie will never face this music. Tivo is owed it all. I expect Tivo will move to shut down 7 million DVRs, and Dish customers will be left stroking their impotent equipment.

wonder if any of this effects the dish DVR PAL for OTA TV?

if E is unabl;e to settle for whatever reason I wonder how many subs E would lose?

msmith198025

June 8th, 2009, 07:44 AM

if E is unabl;e to settle for whatever reason I wonder how many subs E would lose?

My guess would be quite a few.

Of course you have some who have no idea what is going on, and wont until(if) something happens. I guess then it would depend on what E* did to satisfy them

HDRoberts

June 8th, 2009, 09:00 AM

Turn them all off. Tivo is the king of DVRs.

Having tried Tivo, the Dish VIP line kills. Plus, don't get me started on the "bleep-bloop" noises. Plus, the $13/month fee is crazy.

Just on a political side, patents are meant to encourage innovation by ensuring a profit from an invention. Seems to me, patents have discourage innovation in many cases. Simply patent an idea, then sue anyone who actually develops the technology. Dish DVRs (after the Dishplayer, at least), were pretty innovative.

Also, I don't think the courts (and their lawyers) are set up handle modern patent issues. Look at the Dish case. Hardware that doesn't infringe, software that did. Can you then write new software, have the exact same looking product, and then not infringe? Seems to me, yes, but the judge, sticking to standard terminology in his judgment seemed to say no. Now he is sticking to his ruling (because no judge wants to be overturned, particularly by himself). Seems a panel of experts might be better judges in this matter.

msmith198025

June 8th, 2009, 09:55 AM

Just on a political side, patents are meant to encourage innovation by ensuring a profit from an invention. Seems to me, patents have discourage innovation in many cases. Simply patent an idea, then sue anyone who actually develops the technology. Dish DVRs (after the Dishplayer, at least), were pretty innovative.

On the other hand, license the patent, do not get sued.

I do agree that patents may have stifled competition in some cases, I would guess that it has driven it in many more

cybok0

June 8th, 2009, 11:04 AM

]Having tried Tivo, the Dish VIP line kills. Plus, don't get me started on the "bleep-bloop" noises. Plus, the $13/month fee is crazy. [/B]

Just on a political side, patents are meant to encourage innovation by ensuring a profit from an invention. Seems to me, patents have discourage innovation in many cases. Simply patent an idea, then sue anyone who actually develops the technology. Dish DVRs (after the Dishplayer, at least), were pretty innovative.

Also, I don't think the courts (and their lawyers) are set up handle modern patent issues. Look at the Dish case. Hardware that doesn't infringe, software that did. Can you then write new software, have the exact same looking product, and then not infringe? Seems to me, yes, but the judge, sticking to standard terminology in his judgment seemed to say no. Now he is sticking to his ruling (because no judge wants to be overturned, particularly by himself). Seems a panel of experts might be better judges in this matter.

I have mine with D*, so I only pay $5 a month, well that's $5 a month for 4 DVRs.:)

msmith198025

June 8th, 2009, 11:35 AM

I have mine with D*, so I only pay $5 a month, well that's $5 a month for 4 DVRs.:)

Got to love that D* DVR rate structure:thumbup:

cybok0

June 8th, 2009, 11:59 AM

Got to love that D* DVR rate structure:thumbup:

One of the main reasons I like D*.:)

msmith198025

June 21st, 2009, 09:15 PM

Any satguys want to start this off, feel free.
Just remember to keep personal attacks out and it is all good.:thumbup:

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:14 AM

Charlie should stop playing games and find a way to "settle" this BS. If not, you can bet your sweet bippy that the VIP's are going to be the next box to be shut down.

And all it will take is a simple contempt motion from Tivo to get it done.

Skyhi

June 22nd, 2009, 11:17 AM

fallout2600

June 22nd, 2009, 11:19 AM

VIPs are not going to get turned off...don't drink the koolaid!

HDRoberts

June 22nd, 2009, 11:21 AM

Just what we want. The Tivo fanboyism carried over here.:(

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:26 AM

Funny username. :thumbup:

There's no way DVRs are getting shut down.

Never say never. Charlie has a history of throwing his customers under a bus when having to make a choice between paying up or keeping his customers happy.

Ask the people in Washington that didn't have locals for 6 months.

Skyhi

June 22nd, 2009, 11:27 AM

Never say never. Charlie has a history of throwing his customers under a bus when having to make a choice between paying up or keeping his customers happy.

Ask the people in Washington that didn't have locals for 6 months.

It's not going to happen. E* would go out of business....I'd switch immediately if I lost my DVR.

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:29 AM

VIPs are not going to get turned off...don't drink the koolaid!

No kool-ade. Just stating a fact (as unpopular as that may be).

If Tivo wants to go after the VIP's all it will take is a simple legal motion. No trial, no jury, a simple piece of paper that says the VIP's are merely colorably different is all it will take.

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:31 AM

Just what we want. The Tivo fanboyism carried over here.:(

"Fanboyism"? :offtopic-929432:

Please keep you personal attacks to yourself. If you can't discuss the topic I suggest you put me on ignore.

fallout2600

June 22nd, 2009, 11:32 AM

Just what we want. The Tivo fanboyism carried over here.:(

I agree.

msmith, what say this thread gets moved to the Technology forum? We don't need the whole "Charlie doesn't care about his customers" crap getting started in here....

Skyhi

June 22nd, 2009, 11:34 AM

If Tivo wants to go after the VIP's all it will take is a simple legal motion. No trial, no jury, a simple piece of paper that says the VIP's are merely colorably different is all it will take.

I admit I havn't followed this case at all, but if the VIPs are colorably different, E* should be in the clear, right?

I think you're probably understating things a bit when you say a simple legal motion.....E* would certainly respond to the motion....

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:35 AM

It's not going to happen. E* would go out of business....I'd switch immediately if I lost my DVR.

I agree Charlie would be crazy to let it get that far, but did anyone think it would get this far?

Charlie was found to infringe twice and was also found to be in Contempt of Court. Does this sound like a guy who is suddenly going to give up and settle?

If the boxes go dark there is only one person to blame.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 11:38 AM

It's not going to happen. E* would go out of business....I'd switch immediately if I lost my DVR.

I agree. E* will not allow this to happen if they can prevent it.
If it were to happen, there would be a mass migration of subs to other companies.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 11:39 AM

I agree Charlie would be crazy to let it get that far, but did anyone think it would get this far?

Charlie was found to infringe twice and was also found to be in Contempt of Court. Does this sound like a guy who is suddenly going to give up and settle?

If the boxes go dark there is only one person to blame.

This is typical charlie though. Take it as far as you can, but he knows, that without DVRs, the company is toast.
Settle will be a last resort, but it would happen before DVRs are cut off, IMO.

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:39 AM

I admit I havn't followed this case at all, but if the VIPs are colorably different, E* should be in the clear, right?

I think you're probably understating things a bit when you say a simple legal motion.....E* would certainly respond to the motion....

Yes, If they are more than colorably different there is no contempt. Only problem is that the VIP's use the same software that was just found to infringe (again).

Yes, of course E* would be able to respond. My point is there will be no Jury, and most importantly, no 5 year delay. All Tivo will have to do is file a contempt motion with the same judge that just found E* to infringe for a second time and also found E* in contempt.

I don't know about you but I don't think Charlie is going to like the outcome if TIVO files a contempt motion on the VIP's.

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:41 AM

This is typical charlie though. Take it as far as you can, but he knows, that without DVRs, the company is toast.
Settle will be a last resort, but it would happen before DVRs are cut off, IMO.

Yea, like I say, Charlie would be crazy and be committing business suicide, but never say never, Charlie is a "stubborn" man. :)

Skyhi

June 22nd, 2009, 11:42 AM

I agree Charlie would be crazy to let it get that far, but did anyone think it would get this far?

Charlie was found to infringe twice and was also found to be in Contempt of Court. Does this sound like a guy who is suddenly going to give up and settle?

If the boxes go dark there is only one person to blame.

It doesn't surprise me that it got this far......

He'll give up and settle if it means staying in business....

I don't care either way about Charlie.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 11:45 AM

Yes, If they are more than colorably different there is no contempt. Only problem is that the VIP's use the same software that was just found to infringe (again).

Then why have they not gone after them already? Honest question, I have not been following it that much myself

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 11:47 AM

By the way, welcome to the new members:thumbup:

Hope you take the time to get involved with the other discussions as well

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:51 AM

It doesn't surprise me that it got this far......

He'll give up and settle if it means staying in business....

I'm not yelling fire so don't take it that way but it takes two to "settle". Who's to say TIVO even wants to settle? What if after over 5 years of Charlie's BS TIVO doesn't want to deal with Charlie? What if they just want the damages owed and the boxes shut off?

I don't care either way about Charlie.

Neither do I but I will admit I always get a kick out of watching a bully take a beating. Charlie could have settled for a $1.50 a box a couple of years ago but decided to do what he does best, go to court and get pounded.

Oh, and does anyone else find it ironic that a guy who constantly whines about "pirating" was found guilty of "infringement" twice? :free-happy-smileys-

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 11:55 AM

Then why have they not gone after them already? Honest question, I have not been following it that much myself

I would be lying if I gave you an answer to that question. Bottom line is I don't know.

If I would have to guess I would say that TIVO is going to wait until after the damages hearing in front of Judge Folsom next month. They probably don't want to start anything new until they close the book and the 8 named models.

Same reason TIVO hasn't gone after any of the other MSO's that they think are infringing. IMO.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 11:55 AM

I'm not yelling fire so don't take it that way but it takes two to "settle". Who's to say TIVO even wants to settle? What if after over 5 years of Charlie's BS TIVO doesn't want to deal with Charlie? What if they just want the damages owed and the boxes shut off?

Good point

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 05:38 PM

Looks like the Sat Guys thread is toast.

http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-network-forum/153883-tivo-vs-e-124.html

It amazes me that every thread on every board a certain "internet lawyer" goes gets shut down. :confused:

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water.... :eek:

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 06:02 PM

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 06:09 PM

I agree.

msmith, what say this thread gets moved to the Technology forum? We don't need the whole "Charlie doesn't care about his customers" crap getting started in here....

You guys moved the thread already? Technology The home for PC's, Video Games, and anything technology related. :pleur:

WOW!! And someone accused *ME* of "fanboyism"! :free-happy-smileys-

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 06:10 PM

You guys moved the thread already? Technology The home for PC's, Video Games, and anything technology related. :pleur:

WOW!! And someone accused *ME* of "fanboyism"! :free-happy-smileys-

I can see how it can go in either place. The discussion will be the same in either, and I left a redirect link in the other part of the forum.

So, 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. No big deal

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 06:18 PM

They simply wanted to keep the political talk and personal insults out of it. I agree with their decision.

We do not mind the politics of it, the main reason we are here. However personal insults will have the same result at both places. Just too much to deal with, and we dont (and them to an much greater degree) have the time to babysit a thread all day. I am sure that most posters understand that, even if sometimes discussions get heated. We understand that as well, and will keep moderation to a minimum (I hope we have to do none, but that will depend on the members)

I agree there is no reason for personal attacks. My point is someone has had a documented history of making stuff up and passing it off as fact. Said person got caught in a blatent lie, but instead of punishing the liar, the whole thread got shut down.

I don't know, maybe it's me, but it just seems so grammar school. :)

But that's exactly what happens when you ban everyone with a differing view. That is why discussions get heated, IMO.

I just hope we can keep all of the discussions in this thread (when and if it picks up) and all others civil.

Let's hope we can discuss this and leave the "fanboyism" out of it.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 06:23 PM

Fair enough.

Now lets get back on topic;)

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 06:25 PM

I can see how it can go in either place. The discussion will be the same in either, and I left a redirect link in the other part of the forum.

So, 6 of one, half a dozen of the other. No big deal

Nah, That's a cop out. I understand that this topic is a hot potato but really, I'm not buying the fact that TPTB didn't already bury this thread where no one will find it the second someone with a differing view spoke up.

Whatever. I appreciate the fact that you tried to keep the thread (and yourself) neutral. Hopefully something changes with the lawsuits and we have something to discuss other than each other.

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 06:27 PM

Fair enough.

Now lets get back on topic;)

Agreed, unfortunately everything that can be discussed..... :026:

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 06:27 PM

I am the one that moved it though, and I can assure you that is not the reason that it was moved. In any case, this is where it is, and while I do appreciate your view, it will not be moved again

I can promise you that I will keep it at the top of the tech page though, and as more post here it will not be hard to spot.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 06:28 PM

Agreed, unfortunately everything that can be discussed..... :026:

Lol, true enough. Perhaps it will pick up later?

Ergan's Toupe

June 22nd, 2009, 06:52 PM

Lol, true enough. Perhaps it will pick up later?

Count on it. Like I said, this is a hot potato. Give everyone a day or two and this place will be swamped as soon as they grow bored and need their fix.

Skyhi

June 22nd, 2009, 07:49 PM

Fair enough.

Now lets get back on topic;)

Ughh...I'd rather watch paint dry! :) :)

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 08:08 PM

Ughh...I'd rather watch paint dry! :) :)

Haha, not my cup of tea either (I am suprised considering that you actually ARE a lawyer that you are not more interested), but I have no problem with the topic. To each his own, and this could have an impact on many. From time to time I do like to see what people think on this, it varies so much.

Skyhi

June 22nd, 2009, 08:15 PM

Haha, not my cup of tea either (I am suprised considering that you actually ARE a lawyer that you are not more interested), but I have no problem with the topic. To each his own, and this could have an impact on many. From time to time I do like to see what people think on this, it varies so much.

The only thing I know about IP/patent law is that it you basically have to be an engineer to practice it......that was enough to keep me far away. :)

As long as my DVR isn't turned off, I'll be happy!

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 08:18 PM

The only thing I know about IP/patent law is that it you basically have to be an engineer to practice it......that was enough to keep me far away. :)

As long as my DVR isn't turned off, I'll be happy!

You are ahead of the game then, at least compared to me.

I guess I should read up on it

Mainer_Ayah

June 22nd, 2009, 09:09 PM

Agreed, unfortunately everything that can be discussed..... :026:I just posted the new "TiVo motion for interest during the stay period" on my website. It is of course being opposed. This is the certificate of Conference that was filed with the motion.
Counsel has complied with the meet and confer requirement in Local Rule CV-7(h), and
this motion is opposed. Counsel spoke with counsel for EchoStar Karl Kramer on June 9, 2009
and the parties disagreed as to whether TiVo is entitled to the relief on interest requested herein.
Discussions have ended in an impasse, leaving an open issue for the Court to resolve. In fact, the
parties stipulated to their disagreement, and to present the issue to the Court for resolution.
Docket No. 936.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 09:15 PM

Welcome Mainer.

Interesting first post:thumbup:
Hopefully, I can learn something about this case from you guys

Mainer_Ayah

June 22nd, 2009, 09:18 PM

One other new item, Folsom stayed the action taken against TiVo by E* that was transferred from DE pending the outcome of the appeal. That document also can be found at http://southernme.com/DAVY_v_GOLIATH/

Mainer_Ayah

June 22nd, 2009, 09:27 PM

Welcome Mainer.

Interesting first post:thumbup:
Hopefully, I can learn something about this case from you guys
Thanks, hopefully the atmosphere will be a little more welcoming here. It seems at Sat guys and DBS every time I posted something controversial I was ridden out of town by the mods. They have to understand that if the Hatfields are going to run a BB now and then a McCoy might stop by with something to say that might ruffle a few feathers. I'll be the first to admit I deserved a warning now and then, but that was only out of the frustration of seeing all those Hatfields talking trash, and not getting warned as well.
Anyway, this McCoy is more interested in spreading fresh information around than he is in insighting riots.

msmith198025

June 22nd, 2009, 09:31 PM

The guys there just have a lot to deal with,it is a huge site. They are good mods though.

Anyway, again, welcome, and glad to have ya:thumbup:

Skyhi

June 23rd, 2009, 12:18 AM

You are ahead of the game then, at least compared to me.

I guess I should read up on it

Have fun! :) The only IP stuff I find remotely interesting is the law evolving around file-sharing. Trying to decipher the technical details of the Tivo patent just makes my head spin.

Ergan's Toupe

June 23rd, 2009, 08:14 AM

I just posted the new "TiVo motion for interest during the stay period" on my website. It is of course being opposed. This is the certificate of Conference that was filed with the motion.

Are they talking about the interest on the 103M that Tivo was just awarded?

Am I reading this right? Tivo wants prime and Charlie wants to pay NOTHING?

msmith198025

June 23rd, 2009, 04:06 PM

Some new Tivo news

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/patterson/53918;_ylt=AgW0KVJzzn4OugoYdAbNU20WLpA5

Word is that the newly emboldened maker of the TiVo DVR wants to bring—or at least license—its time-shifting technology to "every U.S. pay-television system," starting (perhaps) with Time Warner Cable.

Bloomberg (via Engadget HD) reports that TiVo, which recently won a key patent case against EchoStar and Dish, is now in talks with Time Warner Cable and other "pay-TV providers."

Mainer_Ayah

June 23rd, 2009, 05:02 PM

Are they talking about the interest on the 103M that Tivo was just awarded?

Am I reading this right? Tivo wants prime and Charlie wants to pay NOTHING?
Yes he wants to pay nothing. It is the interest for the stay period. His attitude will serve no other purpose than to really piss off the court.

Ergan's Toupe

June 23rd, 2009, 05:22 PM

Yes he wants to pay nothing. It is the interest for the stay period. His attitude will serve no other purpose than to really piss off the court.

I can't for the life of me think of one good reason why anyone would want to deal with this lunatic.

If TIVO was smart they would take a giant lump sum payment from Charlie and kick him to the curb.

He's the kind of guy that will sign a deal and spend every waking hour looking for a way to litigate his way out of it. Besides, another couple of years of Charlie at the helm and there'll be nothing left of E* anyway. He should have sold the company to AT&T when he had the chance. How good does that $50 a share offer look now?

If I was TIVO I would sign a deal with DTV that gives TIVO a cut of every E* sub that signs up with D* and make Charlie shut the boxes off. Enough is enough. TIVO doesn't need Charlie's BS anymore.

Mainer_Ayah

June 23rd, 2009, 08:52 PM

If TIVO was smart they would take a giant lump sum payment from Charlie and kick him to the curb.

That's one theory behind the reason there hasn't been a settlement. TiVo wanting lump sum E* wanting monthly payments. Yeah sure, a dollar down and the chase is on.

msmith198025

June 23rd, 2009, 09:24 PM

That's one theory behind the reason there hasn't been a settlement. TiVo wanting lump sum E* wanting monthly payments. Yeah sure, a dollar down and the chase is on.

If they get a settlement or a license, which do you think would be better for them?

msmith198025

July 1st, 2009, 09:28 PM

New news in the satguys forum about this case. Please keep it civil there if you post

http://www.satelliteguys.us/dish-network-forum/180150-dish-tivo-case-stay-granted.html#post1878689

msmith198025

August 3rd, 2009, 03:23 PM

http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/localnews/2009/07/29/echostar-975m-sanctions-too-high-57.php

More tivo/E* news for ya

Derwin0

August 4th, 2009, 12:02 PM

Scott posted this over at SatGuys:

TiVo Statement on Developments in Lawsuit Against EchoStar

ALVISO, Calif., Aug. 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO), the creator of and a leader in television services and advertising solutions for digital video recorders (DVRs), indicated today that on August 3, 2009, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) issued an Office action with respect to Claims 31 and 61of TiVo's Multimedia Timewarping System patent, U.S. patent number 6,233,389 (the "Barton Patent"), preliminarily rejecting the patent claims. TiVo offered the following comment on the PTO preliminary finding:

"The Office action is a preliminary finding, entered in the normal course before TiVo has had any opportunity to present its views. TiVo believes that the PTO's preliminary finding will not affect EchoStar's appeal of the June 2009 ruling by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas finding EchoStar to be in contempt of court." "This is an initial step in the lengthy process known as 'reexamination,' and it is not unusual for the PTO to provide a preliminary finding of invalidity and to then later find that the claims are valid after hearing an explanation from the patent owner. Indeed, this is precisely what happened with the first reexamination of the Barton Patent that EchoStar filed in 2005. Among other things, the next step in the reexamination process provides TiVo, for the first time, the opportunity to discuss and distinguish the references presented by EchoStar, and to present new claims."

msmith198025

August 4th, 2009, 12:11 PM

Thanks, I had just noticed it myself:thumbup:

msmith198025

August 11th, 2009, 11:04 AM

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601204&sid=aSSS17Z9s.04

Legal expenses keeping profit down ?

Net income fell to $63.4 million, or 14 cents a share, from $335.9 million, or 73 cents, a year earlier. The company had a $196.4 million expense related to a legal battle with TiVo Inc. Sales were little changed at $2.9 billion, in line with the average analyst estimate.

$194 million on this case alone? Wow:05:

msmith198025

August 27th, 2009, 07:17 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090826-712798.html

Dish Network Corp. (DISH) and sister company Echostar Corp. (SATS) said Wednesday they were pleased that the review over the validity of TiVo Inc.'s (TIVO) patents would continue.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office dismissed TiVo's petition to cease a re-examination of its patents, Dish and Echostar said in a statement. The move ensures that the legal battle between the two will continue to drag on.

msmith198025

August 27th, 2009, 07:18 AM

http://www.multichannel.com/article/326956-TiVo_Patent_May_Be_Invalid.php?rssid=20059

msmith198025

September 6th, 2009, 02:27 PM

DISH NETWORK AND ECHOSTAR STATEMENT REGARDING TIVO

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. – Sept. 4, 2009 – DISH Network L.L.C., a subsidiary of DISH Network Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH), and EchoStar Technologies L.L.C., a subsidiary of EchoStar Corporation (NASDAQ: SATS), issued the following statement regarding recent developments in EchoStar Communications Corporation vs. Tivo:
“We are pleased that the district court rejected Tivo’s request to award a billion dollars in sanctions and that it found that any violation of the injunction was not willful. While we disagree that any amount of sanctions was warranted, the decision confirms our belief that we designed around Tivo’s patent in good faith. We believe that we ultimately will prevail on appeal.”

From satguys

http://www.contracostatimes.com/business/ci_13270102?nclick_check=1

msmith198025

September 6th, 2009, 02:29 PM

Tivos response

TiVo Statement on U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Ruling on Contempt Sanctions Against EchoStar Communications Corporation

ALVISO, CA — September 4, 2009 — TiVo Inc. (NASDAQ: TIVO), the creator of and a leader in television products and services for digital video recorders (DVR), offered the following statement today regarding the contempt sanctions ordered by the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, in the lawsuit against EchoStar Communications Corporation:

"We are pleased by the Court's ruling to impose contempt sanctions of approximately $200 million against EchoStar for its continued violation of a Court-ordered permanent injunction, and to award TiVo its attorney fees and costs incurred during the contempt proceedings. This brings total damages and sanctions in this case to approximately $400 million through July 1, 2009, plus attorney fees, and is exclusive of potential further damages and sanctions.

Additionally, we are pleased that the Court 'will seriously entertain the award of enhanced sanctions' if 'EchoStar is unsuccessful on appeal and nevertheless continues to disregard this Court's orders.'

We are confident that this ruling brings us closer to final resolution."

msmith198025

April 20th, 2011, 03:42 PM

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/09-1374.pdf
Well over a year later and it is still ongoing with no signs of slowing down.

In sum, we vacate the court’s holding of contempt of the infringement provision and remand for the court to make a finding concerning any colorable difference be-tween the previously adjudicated infringing devices and the newly accused devices. We vacate in part the dam-ages awarded for continued infringement. We affirm the district court’s finding of contempt of the disablement provision of the court’s injunction and the sanctions imposed by the district court.
AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED

rey_1178

April 21st, 2011, 06:59 AM

the never ending story :augentreher: :thumbdown:

msmith198025

April 21st, 2011, 07:10 AM

With the same posters at satguys. lol

msmith198025

May 2nd, 2011, 07:34 AM

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11100980/1/dish-echostar-pay-500m-in-tivo-settlement.html

Dish Network and EchoStar initially will pay TiVo $300 $300 million with the remaining $200 million distributed in six equal annual installments between 2012 and 2017, the companies said in a joint press release.

The parties also granted certain patent licenses to each other.

TiVo first sued Dish Network and EchoStar in 2004 for infringing on patents covering its "Time Warp" digital video recorder technology.

Interesting turn of events.