TiVo Wins Permanent Injunction Against EchoStar 437
ZenFodderBoy writes "It's official! Judge Folsom entered his ruling today granting TiVo nearly $90 million in damages, plus granting a permanent injunction calling for the disabling of nearly all of EchoStar's DVRs within the next 30 days. EchoStar's motion to stay the injunction pending appeal was denied. Additionally, the judge reserves the right to grant additional damages in the future, so treble damages may still be coming. Excellent news for TiVo!"
Stock? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stock? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Stock? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course this would be a setback for the projects but it wouldn't be enough to kill them.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus it's really gonna screw over guys like this [engadget.com].
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, this particular injunction was immediately stopped by a higher court:
EchoStar Announces Federal Circuit Blocks Tivo Injunction
ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 18, 2006--EchoStar Communications Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH) issued the following statement regarding recent developments in the Tivo Inc. v. EchoStar Communications Corp
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First off, Tivo makes a competing product. They're not just an IP company, like the worst trollers out there.
Second, Tivo did initially negotiate with Dish to make a Tivo PVR for Dish. Dish decided to end the negotiations and make their own PVR. One can argue from this that Dish knew they were "stealing" Tivo's technology.
/. is an editorial factory (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:/. is an editorial factory (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually I think this is good news for everyone. I have a Dish 625 PVR and I love it. I've always heard how great Tivo was. It's great not just because of the superiority of hard drive recording but it was great because of the Tivo software. The Dish PVRs aren't that bad but I have a feeling that Dish Tivos would be fantastic.
The great thing about the Dish PVRs is they record the mpeg2 stream. They don't have to lose quality in the conversion of analo
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Assuming of course you are happy with the amount of compression the digital satellite company places on the stream. I know I looked at getting a DirecTiVo box which also recorded the digital stream. They made the mistake of showing Boomerang on the floor display: jaggy artifacts all along every high-contrast line in the animation. Apparently someone thought they cou
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A stupid judgment that penalises customers... (Score:5, Interesting)
What fault is it of the customer, if the vendor from who he purchsaed some product / service is found guilty of patent abuse? If Echostar has abused TiVo's patents and sold a few millions of their products... I think a more equitable judgement ought to be along the lines... like, Echostar to pay TiVo the requisite license money so that existing customers may continue to use their products and services uninterrupted.
A patent should not imply that one single company has exclusive rights to implement, sell and support products based out of the said patent. The true purpose of patents is in fact, to spur innovation... not to build monopolies. Echostar might be directed NOT TO sell future products in violation of patents... it appears UNJUST that existing customers suffer a loss of functionality because of this. What if a patent violation happened in a medicinal drug? Patients must vomit already ingested medicines and die?
Re:A stupid judgment that penalises customers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Patents don't imply that, they are that. But I agree that you're quite right about the injustice of the injunction, and about the most obvious way of settling the matter without injuring third parties.
In the software realm, if, to pick an example close to the hearts of many in the legal profession, WordPerfect were suddenly found to have violated a patent, would it be appropriate to disable all copies of WordPerfect and force users to purchase another product, just so that they could read from and write to their existing files? And how could such users determine that the product they'd been forced to buy wouldn't in turn have a self-destruct injunction filed against it next month?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, a monopoly spurs innovation by doing exactly that - granting a temporary monopoly on the patented idea. This is what encourages individuals and companies to invest the time and manpower to create something new: they get to reap ALL of the benefit for a period of time until the idea becomes part of the public domain. This is how it is supposed to work.
I do agree, however, that EchoStar should've been forced to p
Re:A stupid judgment that penalises customers... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:A stupid judgment that penalises customers... (Score:4, Insightful)
The injunction gives bite to the verdict... now Echostar has to either pay up what the verdict says...or work on a settlement agreement... of course, it still can and will appeal, but in the meantime, it cannot continue to infringe Tivo's patent... else, without an injuction option, a guilty verdict in any patent infringement trial would be meaningless if the infringer could continue to well, infringe...
neither the medicinal drug nor another poster's Wordperfect scenarios are pertinent analogies... medicine already ingested is obviously not the same as a service provided by a company... the drug company has no more rights in the sold drugs... if anything, an injunction would prohibit such an infringer from producing and selling any more drugs, but of course, whether a court would order an injunction against a drug company producing a drug, a court would consider other factors in that type of scenario, such as whether the drug is taken for life/health threatening reasons (a cancer drug vs. an erection drug)...and whether there are alternative sources for similar drugs (the actual patent holder produces the drug)...
remember, Echostar's dvr is a service...the customer does not own the dvr software, Echostar does... so the injuction prevents them from continuing their patent infringing service... customers may suffer (although, what do they really suffer? nothing life/health threatening, unless missing Laguna Beach or another retarded episode of The Hills would create mind crushing depression leading to a surge of bulemia among silly girls), but that is Echostar's fault, not Tivo's...
So, the judgment is not stupid...its a tool to enforce the verdict and stop a convicted infringer from continuing their illegal activity
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This is not true in a lot of cases. I for one own my echostar dvr and don't pay a monthly service fee for it. Also, most people (unless they got the dvr for free at initial order time) paid for the hardware as well, even if they do pay a monthly service fee. Seems to me that Echostar could just drop the monthly dvr service fee and they would be in compliance, provided they didn't ship any more dvr units. Tha
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow, that really sucks. You should call customer service at Echostar and tell them to stop selling you stolen things, and tell them to pay the rightful owners for what they stole, and then your equipment will work.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As for the consumers, their best recourse is to sue the company that made the product they bought that has been found to violate patents to get their money back if the product doesn't work anymore. A class action law
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:/. is an editorial factory (Score:4, Insightful)
Eh, I'm a happy customer of both Dish Network and TiVo and definitely think this is a good thing, including for consumers and even Dish Network customers.
I chose to pair a SA (Stand Alone) TiVo over a DishPVR for a multitude of reasons:
Of course I lose out too, most notably with occasional channel change mishaps that cause the wrong channel to be recorded as well as the lack of ability to record the digital stream right off the satellite.
Now I have two TiVos
I've been following this case for a while, TiVo pproached Echostar seeking to license TiVo's technology. They even left a demo unit with them (which Echostar "lost"), then Echostar amazingly came out with new DishPVRs that were cheap knockoffs of the TiVo.
If there was ever a case of blatant patent infiringement this is it, umlike the NTP/RIM debacle where a patent troll was exploiting an obviously BS patent where they didn't even make a product, in this case Echostar ripped off TiVos technology in order to compete with them.
We mustn't confuse patent reform with patent abolition, though obviously some people (certianly some /. users) believe patents should be abolished. If every company that came up with an idea could get is usurped by someone else it would only be the evil megacorps of the world that could succeed, the little guys would get destoyed before they could get a foothold in the market.
Thanks (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh wait.
Re: (Score:2)
every day I read topics on slashdot that I heard earlier that day on cbc, or npr, or the bbc.
slashdot used to be a great site for the latest and greatest breaking news, not its just reruns for everyone else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This
Re: (Score:2)
What finally did it? The dupes? The cut&paste? The complete misreprentation of nearly every news item? That they link to a page with 50 ads that cut&paste the news release instead of the news release?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This won't be good for tivo in the long run (Score:4, Insightful)
Tivo's time will come.
Re:This won't be good for tivo in the long run (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:This won't be good for tivo in the long run (Score:5, Insightful)
That brings up somewhat obvious questions about the applicability and utility of our patent system. TiVO patented something in 1997 that was novel and non-obvious. However, it would have been both obvious and easy 5 years later. So, they get 17 years of monopoly for being ahead of their time.
I dig it though, I have friends who work there, and they could use the money...
Re:This won't be good for tivo in the long run (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This won't be good for tivo in the long run (Score:4, Informative)
Win for Tivo - Lose for Customers (Score:4, Insightful)
There isn't much information on this finding, but I'd take a guess and say that customers that have signed up for EchoStar's service may be in for a rude shock when their PVR stops working.
I'm up for rooting for Tivo but I guess this is business, and if Tivo couldn't find a way to sell their products to the broadcast vendors without going to litigation it makes for a difficult times.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
i wouldn't even be surprised if directv helped fund tivo's legal battle, considering the mess echostar (directv's only american satellite competitor) is in now. their existance could very well be up in the air now.
enough consumer backlash and negative pr and echostar will be ripe for a takeover again. we are four years re
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ahh, you're thinking of the old TiVo/DirecTV alliance. But beginning last year, DirecTV ditched TiVo in favor of selling its own PVRs [pvrblog.com]. DTV customers who got one of the older TiVo-based systems still get to keep theirs, but all new DTV customers get home-grown PVRs. I would think they might be next on the list of lawsuit
Re:Win for Tivo - Lose for Customers (Score:5, Insightful)
IMHO, Echostar got what they deserved. It's a shame their customers may have to suffer for it, but that's the price of protecting the inventors.
Customers lose:Does society or any "inventor" win? (Score:2)
See e.g. http://www.webmink.net/2006/08/breach-of-contract. htm#115565138813415169 [webmink.net].
This is Blackberry all over again (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Litigation-elongating timewasters < Patent litigators < Inventors
in the general opinion.
Not that this is necessarily wrong, either - patent ligitators are taking advantage of an existing law as it was meant to be used (even if it's a frequently-stupid law). LETs are just gaming the legal system and using their (usually greater) resources to gain an unfair advantage, rather than letting the issue complete the arbitration process and be done with.
One's using the syste
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
IMO its about time Dish has to own up.
Re:Win for Tivo - Lose for Customers (Score:5, Informative)
RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER AGREEMENT [dishnetwork.com]
I guess making it so it doesn't record anything is just a change of "features"... it's still a clock, right?Quick ? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Quick ? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.tivo.com/cms_static/press_85.html [tivo.com]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
More informative Reuters article (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This will do nothing but harm the consumer & T (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm just a Technical Support Representative, but I've been reading about this case long before I worked there.
The initial ruling, I applauded. Yes, Echostar screwed up with Tivo. Yes, I think they should have to pay for that mistake, in monetary terms. Tivo earned at least that much.
However - DVR functionality at this point is just about commonplace - Dish/Echostar's DVRs perform the same functions that Tivo, and 50 other competing products do, and to tell Echostar that it can no longer compete in this now-established market is tantamount to handing the company over to a Firing Squad.
Nevermind the fact that there are now millions of Dish Network customers that are using DVR recievers, that will find out about this case, find that they've lost the functionality that they have been paying for every month - and place the blame squarely on - guess who? - Tivo.
Now, I like Tivo - and I hope they succeed, and again, I'm more than happy to see them monetarily compensated for the situation. But this is not punishing Echostar/Dish - this is only punishing the consumers who have bought those devices and who use them every day, and continue to do so.
On a personal note - this lawsuit will make my life a living hell, becuase those millions of customers will be calling me to explain why they can no longer use the functionality that they signed up for. The first time I recieve a phonecall asking why our DVR service has disappeared and why they cannot use the hard drive on the device they paid for, is the day that I turn in my resignation.
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:2)
I sympathise with your impending doom, because I dont reckon they will blame anyone other than the person at the end of the phone.
Once again though I am reminded about why I use slashdot - there is always someone academically knowledgable (for the smart stuff) or with insider knowledge that can add so much to a story.
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:2, Informative)
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:2)
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:5, Insightful)
This is, by the way, how basic patents work. There's no "it's popular, so you don't have to pay to license the patent" rule. For example, Motorolla has a patent on putting a heat sink on a transistor, and every other electronics company pays them for it. There's an engineer that has the patent on on-screen programmable VCR's, and he gets paid for every single VCR manufactured. The way the world works, that engineer doesn't have a monopoly on on-screen programmable VCR's, but every VCR manufacturer has to negotiate a license before they can (legally) ship their product.
This won't affect Echostar customers, or technical support representatives, unless Echostar decides that they'd rather screw their customers than cut a deal with TiVo. At that point, resigning is a reasonable course of action.
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:3, Insightful)
I would agree with that argument if TiVo hadn't been attempting to resolve patent issues with Echostar for several years. E* can hardly claim ignorance on this issue. They can't now say, "Well we i
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:2)
As for TiVo, I really don't see how they can survive without licensing the technology to Dish TV, Direct TV, and others. If TiVo is bundled with my existing equipment, I may pay for the service; however, if I have to purchase another damn box and have another bill to keep track of, then I d
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:2, Informative)
There are many cable companies that now provide DVR capabilities with their service (usually part of a digital cable package -- gives a lot of the same channels available from Dish, DirecTv, etc.). I can't comment on the pricing because I don't use our local provider's DVR service, but I imagine it is comparable to what you're paying for Dish PVR.
Re:This will do nothing but harm the consumer & (Score:5, Insightful)
A little misdirected anger?
Maybe you have some other reason to be pissed at Tivo. Don't be mad at Tivo becuase Echostar sold you something they stole from Tivo and got caught.
Interesting dilemma for Bell ExpressVu customers.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Working for Cowboys (Score:5, Funny)
The Point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well the correct thing to do would be to let those that have ALREADY subscribed to the service to benefit from it until it expires (or go for another 6 months-year), and just tell new potential customers that "the service has been disabled due to the sh*tty patent laws our country currently has".
But that would be in the consumers' interest, and the right thing to do. We here at Megacorp prefer to screw people over as hard as we can before you run out of cash since HyperCorp will soon leech you of your disp
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I could have told you that years ago. That's the main reason I put together my own DVR about 4 years ago, rather than buying (and hacking) a Tivo or ReplayTV unit.
It has worked out more wonderfully than I could have imagined. The 1 week of taming Linux TV-tuner modules looks so insignificant in hindsight, and is really a one-time thing, as I've set-up DVRs for others in under an hour (each).
No messy, stupid tricks or hacks needed to get
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
To me the scariest of those is Windows. Microsoft has total control at a moment's notice of the large percentage of machines worldwide with automatic updates enabled, and the rest could be compromised with a trojan in a manually-installable critical update. Can you imagine the chaos if world's Windows machines erased their hard drives tomorrow? Not that Microsoft wo
Re: (Score:2)
Of everything on your list, the only thing that I actually have is a cell phone. My game console is a Mame arcade machine. All four of my PC's run Linux. And I don't watch TV at all, and haven't for years.
I am quite content with what I have.
Somehow, I don't think I'm unique, especially among the Slashdot crowd...
Re: (Score:2)
If anything, I think the only thing they can disable is the scheduling ability through its interactive menu (which is
It may be excellent news for TiVo, but . . . (Score:3, Interesting)
Dish to Disable DVRs ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Dish to Disable DVRs ? (Score:5, Insightful)
This would not be a first time for Dish.
The Dish Network management knows how to use their customers as leverage. Every time there is a contract dispute between a program provider and Dish, they make sure that it is clear to the customer how to contact that program provider and pitch a bitch.
I would be surprised if a similar tactic didn't get applied here.
Hack/Patch in 3...2...1... (Score:2)
It's the only way I'd watch any TV ever. Without that.. well, there is just never anything on when I'm around to watch it, so I'd just have to cancel the service entirely.
So... Where is the site with the hack to make the functionality never go away?
I give it 24 hours, 72 tops...
-
Can't they License? (Score:2)
And while I do feel for those customers who are about to lose those services, what else can you do? They don't deserve to be punished, but to let them continue to use something sold to them illegally wouldn't be right either.
Perhaps the
DISABLE YOUR AUTOMATIC UPDATES (Score:5, Informative)
Re:DISABLE YOUR AUTOMATIC UPDATES (Score:4, Informative)
What good is that going to do when they stop sending out the show listings?
Beware of SERVICES that look like PRODUCTS (Score:3)
The key point that Echostar users are about to have pounded into their heads, is that the DVR is a service, rather than a product. This is subtle enough that most users probably haven't realized -- yet (they're about to). A product can't be easily taken back (imagine Dell saying "oops, we're repoing your computer because we made a mistake"), but service can be denied.
I don't know how Echostar's stuff is marketed/transacted, but in the case of my Tivo, I payed a lot of money up front to buy a box and a "lifetime subscription" and I haven't paid a dime since then. In day-to-day use, the device appears to be a product from my point of view, and it's easy to lose sight of the fact that I'm still calling into a server every day -- a server that is vital to ability of the device to be practical.
It's interesting that so many things are like this. Just about everything that includes DRM, for example. I wonder how Apple iTunes Music Store customers are going to feel when the realization finally hits them that all they money they spent on music, wasn't spent buying music. It was spent buying Yes responses from an authorization server.
My next DVR will be a MythTV box. A device that you own can't be taken from you easily. Furthermore, it primary acts in the interest of the user rather than another party. For example, I know that MythTV, unlike Tivo's software, will never go to extra trouble to show me an advertisement on the main menu. And while I can lose access to a particular server that offers TV listing information (DVRs will always need at least some sort of service provided by someone), I'll never be at any specific party's mercy.
Nothing to see here, move along. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:this isn't that bad... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This helps encourage innovation by protecting the innovators from competition that could prevent them from recovering development costs. So in the end it does hel
Re:Patents expire (Score:5, Interesting)
Your UID is very high, so I'll excuse that remark.
That is how it works in theory. In practice:
1) The patentee gets a patent on something he didn't actually invent, but was first to file.
2) Patents are granted on mundane, obvious inventions. (Queue the "obvious invention on a computer/Internet" patents) These are granted because patent examiners don't have much technical expertise in the field and have limited time to check for prior art.
3) If you do actually invent something non-obvious, and the big guys infringe on your patent, you'll bankrupt yourself via legal fees trying to get them to pay.
Dare I say yes?
Re: (Score:2)
NO. Patents are as needed now as they were 200 years ago.
But patent examiners perform such an economically critical job that they should not be butt-stupid about computers.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Shorten the length of time to 5 years.
2) Eliminate "business method" patents.
3) Eliminate software patents.
4) Require a working prototype of any patented invention.
5) Hire experts in the field as patent examiners. PHBs shouldn't be issuing patents [uspto.gov].
Re: (Score:3)
Disagree.
Agree.
Argee.
Agree.
Agree.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
And yours is so exceptionally low.
Your style of argument leaves something to be desired.
Re: (Score:2)
I was pointing out our friend must have not been around for long to realize that the (vast?) majority of slashdotters are anti-patent. He/she is certainly entitled to his/her opinion, but I think the debate on the issue here has pretty much settled that patents are not win-win. I don't think that anyone here can say that they honestly believe the current patent system encourages the progress of science and useful arts as it was intended to.
Re: (Score:2)
HA HA!
Plus your explanation is incomplete. No, the (vast?) majority of slashdotters are not anti-patent. They are in fact "multi-positioned" on the question of patents with a myraid of positions both pro and con depending on the company that's doing the patenting, litigating, FUD'ing, or donating. Trying to determine how the majority of slashdotters feel about any given patent is a mystery at best and will make your head explode in a worst case scenario
Re:Patents expire (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, I think we can skip those Johnny-come-latelys, newbie.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Moreover, the (probably unintentional) answer is in your very telling spelling: ;-)
One with a ploy should not persevere in court, not even if that ploy is (in) a patent (submarine, software, or both).
Re: (Score:2)
yet more abuse of the i word (Score:2)
"The invention allows the user to store selected television broadcast programs while the user is simultaneously watching or reviewing another program"
The only effect this ruling will have is to *prevent* others entering the market and drive up prices. What exactly is innovative about the above. With old fashioned VHS recorders you could do exactly the same thing. Yet another example why the US patent system is broken.
Re:This is about Patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Basically the number one claim seems to be on seeking in an open file if the file is a multimedia stream. In Linux language:
cat
mplayer
Those two lines would instantly infringe on tivos patent.
The next claim is even fruitier.
cat
cat
mplayer
I have a hard time beliving tivo actully did this first, and even if they did where is the invention. When I first got a TV card a couple of years ago this is what I did because it was the easiest way to get the media to play. Needless to say, but I didn't feel like I invented something. Maybe I missed something about tivos patent, I'm not a lawyer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How did this statement get modded as "Flamebait"? It is a basic business axiom.
TiVo won a lawsuit, but they didn't win any new customers yet.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, so what? The PVR is a poster child example of an idea so obvious that it would inevitably get independently reinvented dozens of times. It's not like we somehow wouldn't have PVRs today if TiVo weren't around. And this isn't rocket science; it would be profitable for many companies to bring a PVR to market even without patent protection be
yet more abuse of the i word .. (Score:2)
was Re:never getting a TiVo now