• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

District Court Judge Orders Dish Network To Shut Down All DVR Service

5to1baby1in5

Golden Member
Apr 27, 2001
1,193
63
91
Looks like the decision to buy a lifetime service agreement for my TIVO was a good one.

The order to shut down Dish Network DVR's here.

The federal court's order to block the ruling here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DENVER - A judge has ordered the parent company of the DISH satellite-TV service to stop selling products that compete against TiVo and that infringe on its patents.


U.S. District Court Judge David Folsom is also ordering EchoStar to pay $90 million in damages and interest and shutdown service to customers with DVRs within the next month.

Bloomberg reports that TiVo management is very pleased with the decision quoting an unidentified spokesperson, "This decision recognizes that our intellectual property is valuable and will ensure that moving forward EchoStar will be unable to use our patented technology without our authorization.''

The DVR battle with EchoStar dates back to April when a Texas jury found that EchoStar was violating TiVo's patent.

TiVo won the first round of the battle with EchoStar in April when a Marshall, Texas, jury found that EchoStar was violating TiVo's patent. The jury ordered EchoStar to pay $74 million in damages.

The judge has also denied denied EchoStar's request to stay the injunction pending an appeal. EchoStar lawyers say they have not given up and plan to continue fight the decision.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEW YORK (AP) - EchoStar Communications Corp., parent of the DISH Network satellite TV service, got a reprieve Friday after it initially lost a major court case.


Echostar says a federal appeals court has temporarily blocked a lower-court order that would have forced EchoStar to turn off about 4 million of its digital video recorders within 30 days.

Earlier Friday, a U.S. District judge in Texas granted a motion by TiVo Inc. for the DVR shutdown and ordered EchoStar to pay $89.6 million in damages.

The decision comes after a federal jury in April determined that EchoStar willfully infringed on TiVo's "time-warp" patent, which applies to the way a DVR simultaneously records one program while playing back another.

"We continue to believe the Texas decision was wrong, and should be reversed on appeal," EchoStar said in a statement.

The Englewood-based company also said it is working on modifications to its new DVRs so that they won't infringe on TiVo's patent.

EchoStar is the country's second-largest satellite TV provider with about 12.5 million subscribers.

TiVo, the Alviso, Calif., company that is credited with introducing DVR technology, said it was pleased" with the injunction.

"This decision recognizes that our intellectual property is valuable and will ensure that moving forward EchoStar will be unable to use our patented technology without our authorization," the company said in a prepared statement.

Because EchoStar's infringement of TiVo's patent was seen as "willful," the judge could have tripled the amount of damages, but chose not to. TiVo is pondering whether to appeal that part of the decision, said TiVo spokesman Elliot Sloane.

EchoStar shares fell 70 cents, or 2.1 percent, to $32.05 in midday trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market. TiVo shares jumped 41 cents, or 6.3 percent, to $6.90.

 
Jun 27, 2005
19,255
1
61
Why are they only suing Echostar? My cable box records one channel while I watch another as well. They should be all over Motorola too. Not.

 

Zorba

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 1999
8,273
2,159
136
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Why are they only suing Echostar? My cable box records one channel while I watch another as well. They should be all over Motorola too. Not.
Probably just the beginning of the lawsuits. Personally, I think I have to agree with TiVo on this one. They invited it, they should be able to at least charge reasonable royalities.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Originally posted by: Zorba
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Why are they only suing Echostar? My cable box records one channel while I watch another as well. They should be all over Motorola too. Not.
Probably just the beginning of the lawsuits. Personally, I think I have to agree with TiVo on this one. They invited it, they should be able to at least charge reasonable royalities.
Did Tivo really invent something? It's obvious that some moron at PTO gave them a patent but I'm not convinced their 'idea' qualifies as intellectual property unless there's something unique about how they do it that would not qualify as prior art in wide use.
 

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Apr 29, 2005
5,650
0
0
I don't understand how this ruling went down. They are, essentially, ruling that the first to patent or market gets the monopoly. Kinda seems to go against everything a capitolistic society stands for.

I can see/understand royalty payments for the useage rights.....but not outright banning.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I don't understand how this ruling went down. They are, essentially, ruling that the first to patent or market gets the monopoly. Kinda seems to go against everything a capitolistic society stands for.

I can see/understand royalty payments for the useage rights.....but not outright banning.
First to patent does indeed get monopoly rights in whatever country it is issued. I'm not sure what you mean by "everything a capitalistic society stands for . . ."

You can't just copy what someone else invents/produces, slap your label on it, and then sell it. You can offer to buy the patent outright or get a license for use. Alternatively, you can incorporate in China or Russia and do whatever you like.

I'm still curious about what Tivo claims they invented.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,085
493
126
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I don't understand how this ruling went down. They are, essentially, ruling that the first to patent or market gets the monopoly. Kinda seems to go against everything a capitolistic society stands for.

I can see/understand royalty payments for the useage rights.....but not outright banning.
This is how it works with patents, do you think anybody is going to be making an IA-64 processor anytime soon without Intels blessing? The point is to make it worthy for people to invent and progress technology and idea's.

I dont know the specifics of TiVo's patents. But I have a feeling it is a little more than a simple stop, rewind, record function with a TV in connection.

 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
5,676
634
126
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
I don't understand how this ruling went down. They are, essentially, ruling that the first to patent or market gets the monopoly. Kinda seems to go against everything a capitolistic society stands for.

I can see/understand royalty payments for the useage rights.....but not outright banning.
This is how it works with patents, do you think anybody is going to be making an IA-64 processor anytime soon without Intels blessing? The point is to make it worthy for people to invent and progress technology and idea's.

I dont know the specifics of TiVo's patents. But I have a feeling it is a little more than a simple stop, rewind, record function with a TV in connection.
TiVo claiming they invented the ability to record and reply broadcast signals?

 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,431
82
91
Originally posted by: Zorba
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Why are they only suing Echostar? My cable box records one channel while I watch another as well. They should be all over Motorola too. Not.
Probably just the beginning of the lawsuits. Personally, I think I have to agree with TiVo on this one. They invited it, they should be able to at least charge reasonable royalities.
I've been recording TV digitally longer than TIVO has been around.... they should pay me royalties.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Originally posted by: rudder
Originally posted by: Zorba
Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Why are they only suing Echostar? My cable box records one channel while I watch another as well. They should be all over Motorola too. Not.
Probably just the beginning of the lawsuits. Personally, I think I have to agree with TiVo on this one. They invited it, they should be able to at least charge reasonable royalities.
I've been recording TV digitally longer than TIVO has been around.... they should pay me royalties.
Only if you patent it. But if there's evidence of widespread use of clear prior art . . . then nobody should be paid.
 

catnap1972

Platinum Member
Aug 10, 2000
2,607
0
76
It's already been speculated that if they succeed in taking Dish down they're coming after the rest as well.

Guess I'd better transfer anything I want off my DVR before it's too late.
 

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,155
9
81
damnit! i really hopw they do not shut down teh DVR's that would really suck.

 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,079
186
106
Uh, If you don't like this do not support TIVO and tell em... I run my dish into my computer... So, don't really care.
 

sonoma1993

Diamond Member
May 31, 2004
3,405
19
81
i'll be madder than h*ll if they force dishnetwork to shutdown it's dvr service. I have dishnetwork and their dvr recivers.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
about whether EchoStar illegally used TiVo?s patents for technology that enables digital video recorders to simultaneously store and play back programs, pause live television and other features.

The infringement enters when others use the same or very similar technology to accomplish the above quoted result..
It seems on 'first blush' that there are not many means to pause live tv other than to some how store the feed...

My take is the 'technology' in question is the means.. that that hardware/firmware and software use to accomplish the actions..
Since the actual technology is probably under seal or closed to the public in some manner I'd have to assume the finders of fact agreed that the Echo means to effect their DVR actions was quite similar..
(hehehhe all that to state the obvious... dang I should have been an attorney)
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
While I have no specific opinion on this case myself, I would like to chime in that you can get anthing patented these days. I had to deal wwith some technology patents recently, and the stories I have heard from people who have to deal with that patent office is that it is simply a joke. One of the tings they try to do often is break up these patents as much as possible simpl because they get paid more. Yes, there are patent trolls that try to get vague patents in and things have to be redefined and fit the unity of invention....but ultimately many of their goals are not aligned what what a patent office should be.

then again part of it is that its grossly underfunded for having such an important task
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Often folks will draw up a diagram or what ever it is that depicts the thing they seek to patent and include a process that is open source or what ever the term might be for it.

In some cases the complexity is such that there is really more than one patent needed cuz someone decides parts of it are interactive and not a complete unit but rather, several units in unison.. which may also be a patented item... I think..

I suspect this is the case here.. cuz storage is not the issue nor could playback be so it must be in the process of doing it and not the device that may store and be retrievable from..
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY