Slashdot Mirror
TiVo Wins Permanent Injunction Against EchoStar
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!"
What is this going to do to Tivo stock I wonder? ;)
Forum Foundry, Inc.
"Excellent news for TiVo!" Bad news for consumers.
Thanks for posting some links to the background of this story and for the detailed introduction and background that you added to your entry and for not just linking to another blog entry elsewhere on the...
Oh wait.
He who lives by the submarine patent claim dies by the submarine patent claim...
Tivo's time will come.
Disabling all those PVRs is I guess one way to see justice, but in the end it seems that the customers will wear the brunt of the impact.
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.
I apologize for not being in the know, but does this mean that DirecTv's dvr service is now worthless?
I must bid you farewell....... "walks out amid the gunfire"
EchoStar must disable DVRs, judge rules
"No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
Now they have a monopoly, so can charge monopoly prices. I'm sure that's a win for someone, but I'm not sure how it's a win for everyone.
Disclaimer: I work for Echostar.
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.
-Julius X
remove "-whatkindofspamdoyoutakemefor-" from email to send
No they don't, the whole purpose of patent law allows for a developing party to be the only one allowed to make a certain innovatinve product so they can recover development costs and make a profit off of the idea. Then after a certain period of time they cannot receive funds from companies that wish to develop a product that does the same thing.
This helps encourage innovation by protecting the innovators from competition that could prevent them from recovering development costs. So in the end it does help the consumer because while at first only a few may be able pay for the cost of the product it shows to other companies that it is a product many more would be willing to buy.
Echostar played fast and loose with Tivo's IP. It's great that you seem to think Tivo is owed money, but it's Echostar that decided it was worth the risk. Echostar's customers don't have Echostar DVRs because Echostar thought they could get away with something and didn't. I don't see how Tivo takes the fall for that.
Here in Canada Bell ExpressVu is essentialy the Dish Network Canada. In fact, I believe that was the original name before it was changed. As such, they rely on Dishnet for all their receiver technolgy including receiver software, as I understand it. I wonder how this will affect ExpressVu customers given that I have a Dishnet 510 PVR, branded as an ExpressVu model 5900, if at all. I guess in the long run the solution is going to involve a lot of money from Dishnet changing hands to Tivo. There is no way that Dishnet will let the situation stand and perhaps they're about to get their ass handed to them much like RIM with the Blackberry.
I miss consulting for Echostar! All the managers were cowboy hat wearing good ol' boys from Colorado City. It was the most hilarious and fun group of people to ever work with! To bad our product didn't really work (to much Java way to early) but damn they paid well and let us all chew tabacee' at work! Those were the days... *sigh*
Horns are really just a broken halo.
Isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that all of these customers who BOUGHT this item, can now have it disabled remotely? That's what makes this story interesting to me. Remind me to never buy something that can be taken from me...remotely.
It is a sad day for competition and software development. TiVo's patent is another example of why patents suck. Subtracting the amount of time passed in the media stream during the real time it takes someone to press the play button is obvious, and in fact also reportedly appears in XP Media Center Edition. Obvious things are not patentable, yet TiVo has their patent and is using it to destroy competition. If I were someone who owned one of the EchoStars that will be disabled in the next 60 days, I'd be pretty pissed off.
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?
I paid extra for receivers with PVR/DVR capability. I pay the DVR surcharge each month for each receiver I have activated that has a DVR. I have 180HRS of recorded programs on my DVR I still want to watch. It looks to me like instead of a deal between Tivo and Dish to make things ok, the Dish customers are going to get royally screwed in this case. We paid, took our time to collect programs to watch, and they are about to be taken away unexpectedly. How about a class action suit on behalf of the Dish customers that are about to lose out? dwg
And yours is so exceptionally low.
Your style of argument leaves something to be desired.
From what I understand the patent infrigement is on tivos "Time warping system", which I if I understand it correctly is "pause and rewind live TV" as well as "record one show while watching another".
/dev/video0 >/tmp/in0.mpg /tmp/in0.mpg
/dev/video0 >/tmp/in0.mpg /dev/video1 >/tmp/in1.mpg /tmp/in1.mpg
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.
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.
If you can't compete on product and service, you deserve to go out of business.
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.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
Now some "300,000 series" slashdotter is going to come along and mock me next. Just you wait and see.
;)
Oh, I think we can skip those Johnny-come-latelys, newbie.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Disagree.
Agree.
Argee.
Agree.
Agree.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Fuck tivo.
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.
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
Why is it that the customer has to suffer? A while ago, when Microsoft lost a patent dispute, they urged customers to apply a Service Pack for Office, and stop using the version that got shipped on purchase!
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?
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
All Echostar users should go to the setup menu now and "disable automatic updates". It's a pity that updates, which used to mean improvements, can now mean less functionality. Go to your box(es) now, and disable all update check boxes !
The point is that eveything in the patent is very obvious. It's after all just a "video goes digital", when you do that you get obvious benifits which an oldschool VCR don't have. That does not make it an invention. If you cut out all the crap out of the patent it seems to be a method for accelerating binary file seeking/reading. Somehow I don't think thats anything new.
The trial judge did not award treble damages to Tivo because Echostar sought outside counsel that, as it turned out, incorrectly told them that their DVR would not be infringing on Tivo's right. There was no "playing fast and loose" here. Echostar did exactly what any company should do, but still got burned in the process.
Hello!
The ruling didn't say that Echostar had to kill all of their DVR's. The ruling said that Echostar had 30 days to negotiate a licensing arrangement with TiVo. TiVo has some great leverage in the negotiations, but that's because Echostar refused to negotiate previously, preferring to play "hard ball" in court, and lost.
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.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
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 infringed on the patent, but we didn't know!" IMHO, it was E*'s defiance that enabled cable companies to feel free to implement their own DVRs.
This is definately a win for TiVo. This is definately a loss for E*, but I think the loss was E*'s own doing. It's also a loss for Time Warner, who is not in negotiations with TiVo and a win for Comcast who is. And depending on whether or not you think that TiVo functionality is better than all the other DVRs out there, it may or may not be a win for the consumer.
But as far as E* is concerned, this is exactly the outcome they should have expected if they lost the case. As far as E*'s customers are concerned, I am almost entirely certain that E* will not shut off DVR service to their customers. They'd lose way too many customers to DirecTV - who does license TiVo - or to cable companies who have no injunction over their heads. What will happen is that E* will pay a license fee to TiVo in order to retain its customer base. E*'s profits will go down a little bit. E*'s stock will take a hit. TiVo's profits & stock will go up. E*'s customers won't experience anything different.
$.02
Key to financial independence: Spend less than you earn. Save and invest the difference. Do it for a long time.
For those saying Tivo costs a fortune...WTF are you talking about? Available right now from Circuit City / Worst Buy starting at $69 a unit. Get the FOOCK outta here with this Tivo cost too much. Echo lost becuase they tried to go around Tivo and violate thier patents. Get over it. Echo is no nice company either just like DTV is not a nice company. That is all
. I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
http://www.dishnetwork.com/content/aboutus/presski t/press/index.shtml
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.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The location of this judgement is a popular one for patent trolls, since juries in this area side with patent holders about 40% more than the "average" US jury does.
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. lawsuit:
"We are pleased that this morning, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. temporarily blocked an injunction issued by a Texas Court, while it considers a longer-term stay of that injunction.
As a result of the stay EchoStar can continue to sell, and provide to consumers, all of its digital video recorder models. 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."
About EchoStar
EchoStar Communications Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH) serves more than 12.46 million satellite TV customers through its DISH Network(TM), the fastest growing U.S. provider of advanced digital television services in the last five years. DISH Network offers hundreds of video and audio channels, Interactive TV, HDTV, sports and international programming, together with professional installation and 24-hour customer service.
CONTACT: EchoStar Communications Corporation
Kathie Gonzalez, 720-514-5351
press@echostar.com
SOURCE: EchoStar Communications Corporation
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
The injunction has been blocked: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=68854& p=irol-newsArticle&ID=897186&highlight=
There's a few differences between the Tivo case and the classic patent troll case.
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.