Slashdot Log In
Injunction Against EchoStar Blocked
Posted by
Zonk
on Sat Aug 19, 2006 06:23 AM
from the judge-vs-judge dept.
from the judge-vs-judge dept.
bestinshow writes "ExtremeTech has the news that a judge has blocked the injunction against Echostar Communications selling its PVRs." From the article: "The ruling was the latest in an ongoing battle between TiVo, one of earliest companies to design personal video recorders, now called digital video recorders or DVRS. 'As a result of the stay EchoStar can continue to sell, and provide to consumers, all of its digital video recorder models,' EchoStar added. 'We continue to believe the Texas decision was wrong, and should be reversed on appeal. We also continue to work on modifications to our new DVRs, and to our DVRs in the field, intended to avoid future alleged infringement.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Entertainment: TiVo Wins Permanent Injunction Against EchoStar 437 comments
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!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
question for those who understood this stuff.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:question for those who understood this stuff.. (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The quick turn around on this will probably help keep the legal fight and what it means to co
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And if (I don't know if this applies here, just conjecturing) the patents apply to that code as well, and it can't be distributed anymore?
If someone has a legitimate patent, and the invention was non-obvious when the patent application was made, then the only source you can depend on is the inventor's, if they choose to be sole distributor.
This is good. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is good. (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a philosophically painful case for me because I want to root for TiVo because they have a superior product, but not for patents. And I want to root for Echostar because I have one of their DVRs and would hate to lose it's functionality. I also don't want to root for TiVo because a win for them will negatively impact Dish customers who through no fault of their own are being punished for Echostar's behavior. That's like Microsoft users being forced to remove the Quicktime player from all Windows installations because of some industrial espionage they did against Apple (just by way of example -- it didn't really happen).
Parent
Re:This is good. (Score:4, Insightful)
Tivo enjoyed great profits from their launch, but what they want now is a lock on the market for what was essentially a small up-front investment.
Tivo's current systems are generally superior to most of the competition. Their problem is that they are EXPENSIVE. The cable companies realized that DVRs sell service, so like cell phones they give them away in exchange for monthly contracts. Tivo is selling $400 cell phones in a market where most people expect them to be free (even if a bit more junky). This is why Tivo is losing market share fast.
While I'd love to see Tivo win, the fact is that their original product wasn't that innovative. Others were working on the same sorts of things, but Tivo executed better. That should earn them some bucks, but not royalties for 17 years. Plus, Tivo's up-front expenses were not that high - probably not more than a few 10's of millions of dollars - they were almost certainly fully recovered with a healthy profit.
Patents should exist where they are needed to allow companies to make healthy profits on risky ideas. However, that is all they are needed for - if a company is able to make a healthy profit without a patent, then one is not necessary. Patent lifetimes should probably be tweaked by industry as well - in industries where we expect a high level of expense to ensure quality (such as pharmaceuticals) we should probably grant longer patents (or lower the safety standards to reduce up-front costs). In an industry like toothbrush designs they should probably be shorter. Software patents should probably only last a year or two - as softare is not capital-intensive and a two year head start is plenty to make a profit.
In general patents should exist for the benefit of society - to encourage companies to come up with innovative products. That benefits everyone. However, if a company is willing to do R&D with the promise of a 200% payback we shouldn't be offering them 20,000%.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unfortunately, protection from competition breeds expenses, encourages waste and creates inefficient uncompetetive organizations.
"in industries where we expect a high level of expense to ensure quality (such as pharmaceuticals)"
Pharmaceuticals are a perfect example; they waste 80% of their income outside research. They spend more than twice as much on marketing and administration as they do on R&D. The
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Patents are needed to give people the incentive to innovate to begin with. Let's say that you come up with some novel, highly efficient form of the internal combustion engine. You put millions into research, mortgaged your house, everything. Without a patent, or equivalent legal means of protetion, some auto manufacturer could by 1 engine, tear it down, and due to the economi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You could still sell the rights to your patent to a third party. One possible customer would be another auto manufacturer who wants exclusive ownership of the technology and is willing/able to take on the legal costs to defend it. Another possible customer is a group of lawyers who specialize in these things. No, neither may be a
Re: (Score:2)
Second, you're confusing the problems with the legal system (the cost of bringing suit against a large company) with the principle behind a patent.
Third, calling checkmate incorrectly means that you lose.
In your world there is no reason to innovate at all, since a patent works against you and a large company will just steal your idea. So why do anything?
Re: (Score:2)
Excuse me, but you don't have to be rich to legitimately have an idea first. Some inventors become rich off their ideas, sure, but they didn't have a great idea because they were rich.
Show me the part of patent law that says "to be awarded a patent you have to make more then $x a year" or "you must have m
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Particularly in the almost inevit
Re: (Score:2)
Well, duh. And most of those compounds are probably also not patent protected (you didn't cite a time-range, but only a few dozen patented drugs hit the market each year). If Rite Aid wants to sell their own brand of aspirin they
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Then offer them a 200% payback. Outright. Instead of a patent creating a monopoly, let it be worth a 200% ROI for the patent holder if it gets used in products to a certain amount within the next five (or ten, or thirty) years. Paid by the patent office,"
I'm not sure this is a good way to encourage thrift. "Hey guys, whatever you spend, you'll make double. Now go out there and invent somethin! Save your receipts!"
Seriously, though, the red tape and government bungling that this would encourage would
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You essentially described how the phone company used to work. You know why the telephone company invented the transistor? Simple - their pro
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it weren't for patents it wouldn't even be a business - at least not the R&D side.
Now, if society just wants to say that drugs aren't all that big a deal - who needs them - then maybe getting rid of patents makes sense. However, if that were really the position of society then there is another easy solution - leave the current system alone but don't buy the dr
No confilct there. (Score:3, Insightful)
Monopolies rarely in the long run, or hect short run, produce products that are inferior or of lesser value.
Or put it in the other way, without the patent, other companies or inventors.. can produce prducts that are better. That's the nature of competition.
When did it become obvious? (Score:2)
Obvious when? To whom? Why?
That is what patents protect. Before it is obvious. Someone has to not only come up with the idea but act on it. That last part is harder than anything.
I agree that some patents are inherently silly, being applied for well after prior-art existed. Yet if the disk based DVR and such was so obvious why wasn't it out and established before tivo?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Obvious when? To whom?
To a skilled practitioner of the relevant art, at the time of the invention.
The law already defines that. It's just that it's quite hard to prove obviousness, except in the case of prior art.
Re: (Score:2)
If it was so obvious, as you claim, then the question you replied to stands: why didn't it exist before? Surely, if it was that obvious (and therefore, would be obviously a good moneymaker and obviously something people would pay for) then DVRs would have existed prior to TiVo.
You are falling into the trap of "oh, that's as obvious as the wheel." And yet, if the wheel is so obvious to us now, why didn't ancient civilization X invent
Re: (Score:2)
Surely, if it was that obvious (and therefore, would be obviously a good moneymaker and obviously something people would pay for) then DVRs would have existed prior to TiVo.
Patentability depends on the obviousness of the invention, not the obviousness of the marketability of the invention.
Note, BTW, that I wasn't claiming the TiVo was obvious, just answering the question about how obviousness is decided.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Simple...the necessary HD space just didn't exist at the time (well, economically anyway). First gen Tivos hit the street in what, 1997 or so? HDs then, 4GB to maybe 8GB if you were lucky, were just barely spacious and speedy enough to do what a DVR needs to do. The market appeared because the core technology (hard disks) had matured enough, not because of the idea of recording/viewing directly from HD had b
Re: (Score:2)
This is kind of meaningless. What's actually been said is that TiVo left behind a technology sample which Echostar failed to return, claiming not to know its whereabouts. Far from being suspicious, I'd imagine this is relatively normal and Echostar's inability to return the machine has nothing to do wi
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, really? Then why is it that thousands of people who have used both TiVo and other products (like me; I've used TiVo, ReplayTV, and a generic) think that nobody can touch TiVo's usability? I'd say that there is quite a lot of opinion that TiVo really knows how to make something usable, and nobody else has managed anything more than a kludge.
There are also a lot of people out there who switch thinking the compe
Re: (Score:2)
Tivos are a great product and I agree that Echostar deserves what they get if they "played dirty pool". I have not done enough research to know if Tivo's patent is too broad.
This Tivo patent may seem obvious and broad by today's standards but that may not have been the case when they applied for the patent. Patents exist so inventors can try to benefit before the vultures swoop in and capitalize in on someone else's work.
Tivo needs to get their act to
Re: (Score:2)
I think this is EXACTLY what patents were made for.
The cable and satellite companies control the flow of content. TiVO had no say about that. They have an invention that makes the content more va
Re: (Score:2)
The Wright patent was about the wing-warping control system on aircraft. Part of the result of that litigation was that an alternate method (ailerons, elevators) was developed, which is now by far the most common method.
Re: (Score:2)
TiVo vs Echostar- Echostar is infringing on patents owned by TiVo that allow for the recording of one program while watching another program (aka, anything one can normally do with a VCR) on a DVR.
Echostar vs TiVo- Tivo is infringing on patents owned by Echostar that allow for the pausing, rewinding, and re-forwarding) of live TV on a DVR.
Personally I'd be more afraid for TiVo when the other lawsuit comes to a head. Echostar's violation isn'
WTH? (Score:3, Insightful)
allow for the recording of one program while watching another program (aka, anything one can normally do with a VCR) on a DVR.
Look at a VCR. It holds one video cassette.
Look at a DVR. It holds one hard drive (usually).
Try recording to a VCR while watching another program on the same tape (or on a different tape). It's physically impossible. Recording to and watching from the same
Re: (Score:2)
I find it funny that you choose to argue an analogy (semantics in this case) instead of any other point.
And basically you're trying to tell me that TiVo pa
Re: (Score:2)
If you're saying what I think you're saying here, ie: that a dish dvr can't record one show and watch another one that it has already recorded at the same
One point about Dish's superiority (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i just noticed the original ruling was in *TEXAS* --- it wasn't in that one particular patent-whore friendly federal court was it? if it was, that definately explains the early tivo win, but now that the case is on appeals (and outside of that court), maybe things will be different (read: right).
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of a DVR may be obvious now. But was it obvious then? TiVo was the first to market a DVR and they invented the market. The rest are just trying to profit off the idea (and producing inferior product while at it, something which ruins TiVo's reputation).
Re: (Score:2)
Credit to Tivo for getting there first (commercially), no doubt, and I still think they have the best dvr out
Stayed Tuned For More Judge-on-Judge Action! (Score:5, Insightful)
Consumers win, consumers lose... all of this is irrelevant, the truth is that we have a sh*tty patent system that's vague enough to have two judges give 2 different verdicts on the same case.
In all cases I believe that it is wrong to make EchoStar stop its service immediately, and to remotely disable the current consumers. Consumers that have already paid shouldn't be the ones to bear the consequences. But then again, the consumers' interest is the least of the worries of those concerned...
Re:Merely a common appeal + review (Score:2)
Two judges didn't give "2 different verdicts on the same case." A federal district court in Texas granted an injunction and Echostar appealed for immediate relief to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit -- the court which oversees all patent appeals. The Federal Court temporarily block the injunction granted b
This is automatic (Score:2)
Worst. Article. Evar (Score:2)
MythTV (Score:2, Informative)
Also, you OWN the recordings once you've made them.
Own? really? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to; nearly all modern PCs have the ability to switch themselves on at pre-scheduled times. Just set up MythTV to schedule a wake-up (using nvram-wakeup [sourceforge.net] or similar) and automatically power off the PC when it's idle. (It's slightly arcane to set up, but it works; I only gave up on it because my current PC is very loud when it first powers on, and I have to sleep in the same room as it.)
Re: (Score:2)
Scheduled wakeups probably make it more efficient.
Oh yeah? (Score:2)
Dear mr. judge - has anybody yet told you today to go play with yourself?
</opinion>
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell those of us who have neither tivo or dishnetwork what kind(s) of difference(s) there are. I've considered both companies in the past, but can't see paying someone else a subscription fee for the crap that's available.
Re: (Score:2)
A VCR can only record the channel being fed into it, and has to position the tape in a particular position to write the data, so no.
The TiVo can read from one sector of the disk to play back a program and then x milliseconds later, write to another sector to write part of the program being fed into the tuner. Physically not possible for a VCR, but quite possible for a computer. (Technically speaking,