 ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4 | reply to wanderance
Re: Tivo blows said by wanderance:Doesn't have anything to do with the guide, has to do with the "time warp". At the time that TiVo patented it, it was a very revolutionary idea. If you look at the history of TiVo / Dish it is pretty clear that Dish simply stole the tech inside the dev box TiVo sent to them. This entire thing is from the Series 1 days. TiVo didn't just go after Dish because they felt like it (and not every other DVR manufacture out there), they went after them because it is obvious they ganked the tech. I agree. Not all patents are bogus. TIVO did create the original DVR and Dish flat out stole out. They SHOULD have to pay royalties.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| This one is. Obviousness is supposed to be a consideration. And TIVO was well behind ReplayTV.TIVO did create the original DVR and Dish flat out stole out. They SHOULD have to pay royalties. So says TIVO. I seriously doubt it. Ergen is not stupid. The patent is.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
Jaghar
join:2001-01-30
Painesville, OH | How is the patent stupid? |
|
|
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | It shouldn't exist, for reasons including prior art, and obviousness. |
|
ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4 | said by KrK:It shouldn't exist, for reasons including prior art, and obviousness. The court evidently disagrees with you. In fact now 2 courts disagree, because the appeals court upheld the trial court.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 ThespisI'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.Premium
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX
1 edit | reply to KrK
said by KrK:This one is. Obviousness is supposed to be a consideration. And TIVO was well behind ReplayTV. Both companies were created in 1997.
Replay TV launched two months before Tivo.
I'll let others judge if two months is "well behind". |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
 ·Cox HSI
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to KrK
said by KrK:This one is. Obviousness is supposed to be a consideration. And TIVO was well behind ReplayTV. If they were "well behind" replay, then how on earth did they make it to market several months ahead of Replay?
BTW, many of TiVo's patents were "stupid," hence their being lost on patent office re-examination. The "time warp" patent wasn't obvious, or they would have lost it, too.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
|
Reviews:
 ·WildBlue
| reply to ThrowDemsOut
said by ThrowDemsOut:said by KrK:It shouldn't exist, for reasons including prior art, and obviousness. The court evidently disagrees with you. In fact now 2 courts disagree, because the appeals court upheld the trial court. The court also approved a lawsuit to McDonalds for having their coffee too hot. *rolls eyes* |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to wierdo
Re: Tivo blows said by wierdo:If they were "well behind" replay, then how on earth did they make it to market several months ahead of Replay? Well, they must of used that Patented Time-Warp feature to leap ahead, ReplayTV came out in January 1999, and Tivo's first unit was April, so in a non-time warped universe, ReplayTV was first.
Once the DVR was out, and time-shifting, pausing, jumping forward to real time, etc were all out the so-called "time warp" feature becomes an obvious extension of the technology.
Echostar's first DVR's were built on Microsoft software and didn't actually get released until a few months after TIVO, however Echostar had been showing off the hardware while waiting on the software for months.
The simple fact is these DVR's were developed at the same time. Nobody stole or copied someone else's code, but TIVO was granted a patent on a feature that was common to them all, and now is going sue-happy.
It's a common problem.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to ThrowDemsOut
Yes, the Court disagrees with Justice and what is right all the time. As for the Appeals Court, that means little because all they rule on is if an error was made in the procedure of the first trial, and don't actually deal with the issue at hand. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to Thespis
said by Thespis:I'll let others judge if two months is "well behind". True, but prior art is prior art, and once the first DVR features were being created, the so called "Time-warp" feature becomes an obvious extension of the technology. In reality, all these DVR's (ReplayTV, TIVO, Echostar's) were being developed with similar features by different people at the same time. Nobody "stole" anything. TIVO just got the patent on a "feature" and is going sue happy.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
ThespisI'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.Premium
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX | Echostar?
E*'s first DVR (they actually called it a PVR) was the DishPlayer 2400. It came out about the same time as Tivo. It was a piece of crap that ran Microsoft software and had to be babysat daily. It also had a whopping 8 hours of record time. I sold mine on Ebay for a tidy sum.
The DVR that E* was sued over was the one they developed in house well after Tivo was established with DirecTV. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
| Yes, I stated that already.... However, the feature the patent and lawsuit is based on was already in use and had been developed by other DVR's.
I'm not disagreeing that TIVO got the patent, I just think the patent should be invalidated... which of course would end the lawsuit. Unlikely to occur as well. Echostar is getting ripped off.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
ThespisI'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.Premium
join:2004-08-03
Keller, TX | Echostar violated a valid patent. Period.
They are not getting ripped off.
Corporations can't just disregard patent law because they think a patent should never have been given. |
|
