Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Sues TiVo To Help AT&T
Julie188 writes "Microsoft is suing TiVo, claiming patent infringement. Microsoft is doing this because TiVo has sued AT&T — and AT&T happens to be Microsoft's largest customer of Microsoft's Mediaroom IPTV technology. Microsoft says that TiVo has copied Microsoft's Mediaroom IPTV technology in its DVRs. If Microsoft wins, it would effectively block TiVo from selling DVRs without a licensing deal with Microsoft."
Microsnerf!
I normally hate patent battles but this amuses me greatly.
"Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
The gentlemens agreement never dies! They "fight" so we don't see what really goes on behind closed corporate doors.
Propz to GNAA.
You launch yours, I'll launch mine, and the usual trolls will launch their own just because they can. With any luck, they'll cause enough chaos to bring the issue to light and bring us closer to IP reform.
Wow it looks like Microsoft wants another Monopoly, I'm shocked!
You go girl!
You gotta love how companies have found exactly what to do with patent infringements - put them in a bag and keep them stored away well under room temperature until the right moment when these can be enjoyed - such as, at a time when they can be used to scare or threaten competitors or help achieve a goal. Patent infringement is not patent infringement until such time when it can be exploited to the limit.
Humans are so damn smart it is scary.
Is this an example of "the enemy of my friend is my enemy" or the beginning of "mutual assured destruction"?
Corporate America is one big clusterfuck
Suing TiVo for delivering content ?
Next is Neanderthal suing them for using fire or a wheel ?
Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
The ATT/Microsoft/Motorola DVR sucks giant donkey dicks. You can bet that ATT only wished they could use Tivo technology. We had Uverse installed and ended up using our Tivos downstream of the ATT DVRs, they sucked that bad. The smart thing would have been for ATT to license the Tivo design instead of the locked-down bogus Microsoft design.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
So, what happens if there is a set of law suits with a circular dependency and ALL plaintiffs win? Does that mean we lose?
When one big software company sues another, the only possible outcomes are that either they all back down or they end in Mutually Assured Destruction. Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only. I don't know what TiVo thinks they can accomplish with their North Korea strategy.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Live by the patent, die by the patent...
The same nonsense that allowed Tivo to run amok is now being turned back against it.
None of these shenanigans should be tolerated by anyone at all.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Why doesn't al queda do some real damage and take on Microsoft and sue them for infringement of some kind. I'm sure Microsoft could sue them for somekind of infringement too. Think of the battle that might ensue. Might do us all a favor.
Maybe no one is banning no one but after 64.27.160.198 I can't access Slashdot either, can anyone pls check out? Last two hops are death.
Embrace Communism and eliminate capitalism. This is a prime example of capitalism at work. Communism does not allow for imaginary property to hold back progress.
This is exactly why our computer products cost so much. Someone at the USPTO needs to revise operating procedure because patents are not only being used to protect technology but inhibit it or make it expensive.
I personally have nothing against Microsoft. If its the right tool for the right job, no issues. My gripe is that Microsoft used to be a innovator. Now it seems all they want to do is patent ideas or buy up old patents then sue the person for infringement. I personally believe this is why the computer science field is failing. We are no longer taught how to be innovative but rather double click on a icon.
So, now we know how IP War I(tm) opens on Front #1 (Patents).
There will at sometime be a situation vital to two implacably opposed large opponents, who draw other companies in to the fray for their own interests. They will use Patents to attack. Kind of like all the treaties before WW I drew into two groups, except this will probably be a star configuration, (with the additional bonus of some companies possibly suing others on *both* sides).
I wonder how Front #2 (Copyright) and Front #3 (Trademark) will fare.
My bet is Trademark will be like Switzerland. Everybody wants to own their own rep/name.
I have no idea how a copyright war would start. Perhaps cross licensing schemes? Ah, perhaps not corp vs. corp? Maybe this war will be from human beings to corporations, defining just what is reasonable. that would be truly a guerrilla war. right now file sharing and the like is at most, civil disobedience.
Well, anyway, let's get some popcorn!
who will be able to come up and say microsoft is not in bed with corporations that are enemies of the new digital era, after this incident.
Read radical news here
So let me get this right... TiVo is suing AT&T (and has sued Dish and Echostar previously) claiming that they infringe on the "time-warping" feature of DVRs? The "pause live tv" feature? How exactly is this novel and unique once you get the video into the computer that runs the DVR?
I have a patented the act of recognizing letters organized into words. I hereby order you all to cease and desist from any further reading without first obtaining a license. If you desire to read said license, that will require an additional license.
Wouldn't this sort of 'buddy system' be illegal, much like price fixing?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
My U-verse DVR is so much more usable than a Tivo because of all it's stupendous theft-worthy features.
I'm a former AT&T U-Verse customer, and a former TiVo customer. I switched to U-Verse from T/W because TimeWarner refused to provide adequate support for the CableCards they supplied in my TiVo - channels would randomly go missing causing difficulty or programs to record an hour of black. Had TiVo for years and loved it. Always explained it to people that I'm a tech/programmer who spends all day fighting with computers. I loved that I could come home and not fight with my TV (until the cablecards, that is).
The U-Verse DVR *sucked*. If you pressed the "skip ahead" key at just the wrong interval, it would inexplicably jump to the end of the program with the "do you want to delete this?" prompt. To which I would invariably yell at the DVR "no you dumbass, I just wanted to skip ahead two minutes". The software, frankly was awful in a multitude of ways. I switched to DirecTV, and the DVR software is better, but still stinks compared to TiVo.
For me as big of a fan as I am of Linux, etc it wasn't about the OS. It was about the user experience. The U-Verse DVR did stupid, unexplainable shit often enough that I cancelled it after a little less than a year.
There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.
Reputation should not matter and each case should go to the courts on its own merits. However Microsoft is an old whore with a wicked, dirty, reputation. Judges and juries have got to go into a Microsoft trial with a bit of an urge to tie a hangman's knot and I don't blame them. Considering the several billions in losses that Microsoft has already received in various trials perhaps they should be shy of the court house and not think about dragging people to trial.
i wish someone could explain how tivo avoided being acquired. their user interface is one of the best i've seen, ever. the writing has been on the wall for them for 5 years. the fact that they still exist is a testament to how good of a device it is.
whoever is in charge of mergers / acquisitions at tivo really, really, dropped the ball. they should have been an acquisition target for every major cable company, AT&T, and every major dish company. it's essentially over for them. every TV providing entity has their own DVR now, and they are closing the gap with tivo rapidly. i've been thinking about moving to AT&T U-verse to get out from under comcast's boot, and from what i've read their DVR is as good or better than tivo.
i've had 3 tivo boxes since 2000. i feel an almost brotherly love for them as a company. yes i know how stupid that sounds. it makes me sick they couldn't figure out how to be successful.
If humans were so smart, you wouldn't have to explain the golden rule to them.
Do onto others as you would like to have them do ~1.618 times to you?
Hard to know if you're infringing on a patent. And it doesn't even have to be submarined.
But the VCR patents aren't that. These DVR patents are like VCRs patenting "Recording a moving picture USING A MAGNETIC TAPE".
The VCR patents were
1) how to design the tape caddy ...
2) how to design the helical scan head
3) how to get extra time out of the same length of tape
4)
all things about HOW to solve the problems of "recording a moving picture using a magnetic tape".
These DVRs aren't doing that. They're patenting "clicking on a record button and saving it to a file named CHANNEL-TIME.mpg" on the "how to record on a DVR" problem.
In fact, some of these DVR patents are of the order of "solve the problem of recording on a DVR" as the patent on the solution of the problem of "how to record on a DVR".
I used to work for Kingston Interactive Television and we where one of the first in the world to deliver a working IPTV, EPG & VOD system consumers as a commercial product. We did this in 1999, we won awards, including an EMMA and BAFTA nomination. Kingston had been researching streaming video over the local loop for at least 10 years prior to that, even testing a narrow-band television system. It was xDSL that made it possible. See KITV in action on YouTube.
I designed the VOD & Content management system and we implemented our own solution because nobody offered what we needed as a software product. Executives from every major Television Broadcast, IT and telecom corporation visited, including Microsoft, to see KITV. It wasn't patented then because it was obvious, it wasn't novel enough then, it certainly isn't novel today. It was a well established idea in the 1990's that was waiting for the networking & server technology to match the requirements regarding latency, packet loss & QOS.
I cannot put into words how galling it is to find somebody has patented something you've already done before and done better, both cases should fail because of prior art and have their patents struck out.
Most of the companies have patent portfolios as a deterrent only.
Such companies could at least be more up front about it. For example, a company holding a patent could license the patent for all uses, provided that the licensee does not sue the company for patent infringement.
I have no idea how a copyright war would start.
The copyright war has already started in the United States: Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music and Three Boys Music v. Michael Bolton. A songwriter accidentally writes a song that matches a song that was played a decade ago, and the publisher of the older song successfully sues for seven-figure damages. How should one play it safe while writing a song in such an environment?
Let's see. Skip ahead 2 minutes. That sounds like... skipping a commercial block. Which TV companies say is a Bad Thing. Sounds to me like you were being penalized for trying to skip commercials.</conspiracy>
Just saying.
Apple sues Google to help Microsoft :)
Waiting for that one to be the headline.
See, the Nexus One has a striking similarity to the iPhone. Google is perhaps one of the biggest threat's to Microsoft's solvency, particular with their superiority in search, and their vastly usable ChromeOS.
And Microsoft's Windows product has a critical role in the OS industry that helps Apple reach their target market.
It helps Apple, because it means the general population uses a product that actually is far inferior.
Since almost everyone uses Windows, Linux doesn't seem too special to the general population. The average person has difficulty seeing a benefit to Linux over say Apple.
Apple can continue to justify to people they should buy their product, because it's a "premium OS", better than OS-es that run on less-expensive hardware in every way.
If Google disrupts Microsoft's market position, it could be a huge threat... in a world where ChromeOS or Linux are predominant, MacOS has a lot less value:
The public would have good experience with simple, decent OSes, and be unimpressed with MacOS after trying it. It would make it exceedingly difficult for Apple to successfully sell their "almost the same" "100x as expensive" hardware, when the predominant OS in the market is of reasonable quality and end-user experience.