or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Recorders › Lawsuit happy TiVo, program guides & countersuits. TiVo just sell your product & stop your greed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lawsuit happy TiVo, program guides & countersuits. TiVo just sell your product & stop your greed. - Page 3

post #61 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

All of this stops or limits others from fairly competing in the marketplace due to overly ridiculous restrictions due to stringent patents and so called "intellectual property".

This battle has been going on from the earliest days of electronics.
"Fairly competing" doesn't mean you can use what I've worked on if I've gotten a patent.
Build your own widget that doesn't copy mine, and you're "fairly competing".
Steal my work and don't reward me and it's theft.
post #62 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by veryoldschool View Post

This battle has been going on from the earliest days of electronics.
"Fairly competing" doesn't mean you can use what I've worked on if I've gotten a patent.
Build your own widget that doesn't copy mine, and you're "fairly competing".
Steal my work and don't reward me and it's theft.

More common sense.

There are places that don't follow this basic tenant. Try China, North Korea, and to a lessor degree Russia.

The OP ought to consider moving there since he has such a problem with how things work here.

Hard to believe such rancor toward the fundamental precepts that our system is built on. Brainwashed juries, greedy lawyers, incompetent court systems. How's that tin foil hat fitting these days?
post #63 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

More common sense.

There are places that don't follow this basic tenant. Try China, North Korea, and to a lessor degree Russia.

The OP ought to consider moving there since he has such a problem with how things work here.

Hard to believe such rancor toward the fundamental precepts that our system is built on. Brainwashed juries, greedy lawyers, incompetent court systems. How's that tin foil hat fitting these days?

From what little has been posted here about others doing the same thing at the same time, or earlier, it would seem the lawyers against TiVo must have been fairly lame.
I get the feeling I would have been dismissed "for cause" from being on one of these juries.
post #64 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by veryoldschool View Post

From what little has been posted here about others doing the same thing at the same time, or earlier, it would seem the lawyers against TiVo must have been fairly lame.
I get the feeling I would have been dismissed "for cause" from being on one of these juries.

Perhaps.

Having been a juror more than once, I reserve judgement on matters like that because there is typically a lot more going on than is public knowledge.

What I do put quite a bit of faith in, is that over time there has been a number of these lawsuits, in more than one judical district, and TiVo has never lost one, and either wins or settles with payment.

That alone says quite a lot. Unless of course you think all the courts and all the lawyers and all the jurors are either stupid or corrupt, which I don't.
post #65 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken H View Post

Perhaps.

Having been a juror more than once, I reserve judgement on matters like that because there is typically a lot more going on than is public knowledge.

What I do put quite a bit of faith in, is that over time there has been a number of these lawsuits, in more than one judical district, and TiVo has never lost one, and either wins or settles with payment.

That alone says quite a lot. Unless of course you think all the courts and all the lawyers and all the jurors are either stupid or corrupt, which I don't.

I don't and not being in the courtroom for any of these cases, I have no idea of how the cases were presented, which is all the juries can use to judge the case(s).
Should one side not have submitted enough "facts", then whether right or wrong, it can't be used.
"Not knowing", it seems that:
1) a guide was out before TiVo, so what makes theirs so inclusive?
2) ReplayTV was making a DVR at the same time, so that too seems to negate "all DVRs".

The buffering may be TiVo's, I don't know, but the commercial skip ReplayTV had, though through maybe another means.

Then I wonder about the old Windows Media Center, which was my first venture into something like a DVR. I can't remember if it worked with live TV, as it's been so long, but it recorded digitally, had 30 sec skip, and a guide.
post #66 of 93
Thread Starter 
Quote:


The OP ought to consider moving there since he has such a problem with how things work here.

I have a problem with the gross disparity between the haves and have nots. At no point did I state that patents shouldn't exist or that using someone else's technology without some type of reward to the designer isn't proper, it's the outlandish amounts these corporations ask for and unfortunately receive.

As already stated, it's the corporation that gets the payout, not the few actual individuals that did the work.

The point is all of you, instead of contributing to the thread with additional references base on the original topic, that is the "Guide", you mindlessly and blindly support a system that is well beyond 'broken'.

The problem isn't just in this country.
post #67 of 93
Thread Starter 
Quote:


1) a guide was out before TiVo, so what makes theirs so inclusive?
2) ReplayTV was making a DVR at the same time, so that too seems to negate "all DVRs".
The buffering may be TiVo's, I don't know, but the commercial skip ReplayTV had, though through maybe another means.
Then I wonder about the old Windows Media Center, which was my first venture into something like a DVR.

All of those questions except specifics on the "Guide" are answered in the links I provided.
I most relevant part, I haven't found specific details about yet.
post #68 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

I have a problem with the gross disparity between the haves and have nots. At no point did I state that patents shouldn't exist or that using someone else's technology without some type of reward to the designer isn't proper, it's the outlandish amounts these corporations ask for and unfortunately receive.

As already stated, it's the corporation that gets the payout, not the few actual individuals that did the work.

The point is all of you, instead of contributing to the thread with additional references base on the original topic, that is the "Guide", you mindlessly and blindly support a system that is well beyond 'broken'.

The problem isn't just in this country.

And here we are again, spiraling completely away from the forum's purpose with old and tired arguments which will go nowhere.

I'll add to the OT - if you haven't figured it out by now, we live in a corporatocracy not a democracy. If Wall St. and the complete lack of anyone upstairs paying the price for what happened didn't tell you that, I don't know that a clue-by-four upside the head would help.

Enjoy your rant but there's nothing new to see here, so I'll move along.
post #69 of 93
Thread Starter 
I'm just responding to all of non contributing 'comments'. Apparently they can be dished out, but can't be taken very well.
post #70 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

.... As already stated, it's the corporation that gets the payout, not the few actual individuals that did the work....

The individuals that did the work got paid their salary, they may have got bonuses, they updated their resumes with their accomplishments, and they likely moved on with their lives. The corporation provided the workspace, tools, support, insurance, etc. to get the development done. The corporation had no assurance that the project would ever come to fruition. Many projects do not, and are abandoned at some point during their development. The people working on abandoned projects get paid all along, just as the people working on successful projects do. When projects succeed, the corporation reaps the major reward because the corporation took the major risk.

As far as the $800 million dollar settlement that seems to bother you so much, you should really take your argument to some legal forum somewhere. It would be much more at home there, instead of on AVS. Based on every other lawsuit I'm familiar with, the lawyers got the lions share of that $800 million . . .
post #71 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

I have a problem with the gross disparity between the haves and have nots. At no point did I state that patents shouldn't exist or that using someone else's technology without some type of reward to the designer isn't proper, it's the outlandish amounts these corporations ask for and unfortunately receive.

As already stated, it's the corporation that gets the payout, not the few actual individuals that did the work.

The point is all of you, instead of contributing to the thread with additional references base on the original topic, that is the "Guide", you mindlessly and blindly support a system that is well beyond 'broken'.

The problem isn't just in this country.

Corporations pay engineers to create products. It is the corporation that takes the risk, not the engineers. Engineers can go find other jobs. If the corporation fails, that is that, so to speak.

That said, I know for a fact that the early employees at Tivo got some pretty sweet stock action at IPO back in 1999 as I have a friend that worked there then, so the people who created the product were handsomely rewarded for their efforts. In fact, 2011 was the final year he could take his AMT credit on his stock sale, if that tells you anything. BTW: Early investors in Tivo included Sony, DirecTV, and Tivo Employees.

-Ted
post #72 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by WS65711 View Post

. . . The corporation had no assurance that the project would ever come to fruition. Many projects do not, and are abandoned at some point during their development. The people working on abandoned projects get paid all along . . .

And as we see here in another article in the forums today, projects sometimes do get abandoned. The companies involved take a hit, and sometimes (as in the case linked to) people lose their jobs. Everyone picks up the pieces and moves on . . .

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1408372
post #73 of 93
The OP seems to have a real hard-on for TiVo. No one says you have to feel sorry for them. But hey, they have intellectual property, which the laws of the US allow for (whether software patents should exist is a whole other question - I happen to think they shouldn't), and which as holders of said intellectual property, the laws regarding it require them to ZEALOUSLY DEFEND their intellectual property. You're whining because they're doing what the law says they're supposed to do. Also, because they got an $800 million payout from at least one case (which guess what - the judge and jury are the final arbiters of, not TiVo - and as someone else pointed out, their lawyers quite probably took the lion's share of). So what? If you don't like what the law requires, try to get the laws surrounding intellectual property fixed, don't bitch when someone who's subject to the laws about them does what's expected of them BY LAW.

And of course, I have to laugh about the fact that when someone suggests locking the thread, he cries "omg but first amendment!!!!!111one" - apparently without knowing (or at least understanding) what the First Amendment actually says. I'll send you some extra tinfoil hats.
post #74 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

Looks as no one is able to answer my original question, apparently just too busy standing up for outrageous, uncontrolled greed. Now who is "misdirected"?

If you consider Microsoft's Media Center 7 is functionally (not interface) a Tivo clone from a DVR standpoint and the fact that they recently settled their own lawsuit with Tivo. It may explain the missing STB template in Windows Embedded 8 and the reduction in Win8 versions that have Media Center.
post #75 of 93
Tivo doesn't own the program guide in their units. The Tivo guide belongs to Tribune Media Services which is a sub division of Tribune Company.
Tribune is in bankruptcy and it has not been determined if they will be chapter 11 or chapter 7.

If it wasn't for the lawsuits that Tivo is winning they will probably be on their way out as they only have about 2 million subs in North America. That is down from about 4.6 million subs they had in 2006. The deal Tivo struck with Virgin Media in the U.K. is currently helping their bottom line and also Tribunes because they are Tivos guide provider.

Microsoft, Digeo, Tivo, Zap2It, and I think Direct TV are the biggest users of Tribunes guide service.
Of course Digeo was brought by Arris and has discontinued the production of the retail Moxi. They will end guide support next year as they have no more cash flow from the sales of Moxis to continue paying for the subscription.
Microsoft is considering not including Windows Media Center in Windows 8 and will make it an add on at extra cost for those who want to use it.

The other guide provider is Rovi which purchased Gemstar when Gemstar put themselves up for sale a few years ago.
Rovi is the TV Guide brand and owns the EPGs, TV Guide On Screen and The Total Guide ( which replaces TVGOS) and the IPGs, I Guide and Passport Guide.
The Passport Guide was owned by Aptiv Digital but was bought by Gemstar around 2007.
The Total Guide is both a EPG and a IPG. The same guide will be offered to both the CE manufacturers and the cable operators.
Rovi sold the TV Guide magazine, the TV Guide network and TV Guide.com to other parties as they only wanted Gemstars massive TV guide database.

I really don't think that there will be any viable consumer DVR makers other than Tivo because J6P is not going to spend more than 50 dollars on such a device and it will have to be sold at Walmart because J6P is not a internet shopper.
J6P is also not computer savy and does not frequent internet forums to find solutions to cable/sat equipment.
post #76 of 93
Thread Starter 
Thank you for the intelligent post. As opposed to the 'whine' of a number of selected forum members that got all bent out of shape because of three short sentences in my OP.

BTW, I beleive there are a number of "J6P" (interesting acronym) that are spending $400 on the CM unit aren't there??
post #77 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

So, my question is;
Just what can or can not a manufacture/importer/seller of a DVR do and/or design into a DVR, namely the program Guide, without getting sued?

You really need to contact a lawyer in order to answer this question, as you clearly already seem to understand the situation with patents complicates the answer. However, you and I both know that everyone who has been sued by Tivo consulted their own legal staff before offering products which might infringe and clearly they decided to "roll the dice" and risk litigation. Now that litigation has occurred as a result of a business disagreements, do you now begrudge the patent holder for defending the patents they hold. It happens every day all over the world. Forget about whether you think Tivo should have been granted the patents to begin with, the fact is that they do have the patents. The courts are the mechanism to resolve these types of disputes after business negotiations stall.

As I recall, Tivo negotiated in good faith for a very long time before filing lawsuits? It seems the big corporations thought they could walk over a smaller company and get away with infringement due to their size and market positions. Now these plans seem to be biting them in the ass and they are now having to pay what the courts determine they should have paid all along......
post #78 of 93
I for one would not shed any tears if the Patent and trademark office got deleted from the federal budget...
post #79 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooper View Post

I for one would not shed any tears if the Patent and trademark office got deleted from the federal budget...

Isn't that like saying, you don't care if a bank gets robbed, because you don't have your money there?
post #80 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

Thank you for the intelligent post. As opposed to the 'whine' of a number of selected forum members that got all bent out of shape because of three short sentences in my OP.

BTW, I beleive there are a number of "J6P" (interesting acronym) that are spending $400 on the CM unit aren't there??

Your Welcome!

I see your thread as not Tivo supressing the DVR market because of patent infringement but more of Tivo surviving on DVR sales and the guide provider making enough of money to keep their business profitable.
Basically one can not survive with out the other.

As for the CM 7400 I see the same issue that Tivo has. You have a device that is $400 to purchase and also you have to pay a monthly fee in order to have a decent guide. J6P is not going to pay TMS $40 or $50 month for the guide.
Also what happens to the CMs guide if Tribune is forced to liquidate itself because of bankruptcy. Also for about $150 more you can get a dual tuner Tivo with lifetime subscription and even cablecard support to boot.

Actually I see the content owners who are responsible for killing the DVR market. To many restrictions on what you can record and also the ever rising cost of the content itself.
If the content keeps becoming more and more expensive, Mr and Mrs J6P is going to be priced out of the market no matter how they try to receive the content.

Disney and Fox News Corp is considering of exiting the broadcast tv market and taking their network tv content to cable/sat channels. Also they are considering ending their relationship with the local affiliates and then charging them to distribute their content.
post #81 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by veryoldschool View Post

Isn't that like saying, you don't care if a bank gets robbed, because you don't have your money there?

It's more of a statement of how I don't think too highly of the job they're doing (or not doing, as the case maybe).
post #82 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooper View Post


It's more of a statement of how I don't think too highly of the job they're doing (or not doing, as the case maybe).

They are victims of the laws the government gave them.
post #83 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncted View Post

They are victims of the laws the government gave them.

That doesn't explain a lack of common sense.
post #84 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed1 View Post

J6P is not going to pay TMS $40 or $50 month for the guide

I believe CM charges $50 per year.

Quote:


Actually I see the content owners who are responsible for killing the DVR market.

Dead?

About 44% of American TV households now have at least one digital video recorder, up from 8% in 2005, and 62% digital cable subscribers now use video-on-demand at least monthly versus 52% a year ago, according to a consumer survey by Leichtman Research Group.
post #85 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed1 View Post

Of course Digeo was brought by Arris and has discontinued the production of the retail Moxi. They will end guide support next year as they have no more cash flow from the sales of Moxis to continue paying for the subscription.

Also, the Moxi guide service is not going to be discontinued by Arris next year - they initially posted that on their website but quickly retracted it when folks found out and complained. Now the end date is yet to be determined for Moxi. Same as with ReplayTV, in other words, but at least D* gets some money for monthly subs for those units.
post #86 of 93
Thread Starter 
Quote:
I for one would not shed any tears if the Patent and trademark office got deleted from the federal budget...

That would be the other extreme.
Quote:
That doesn't explain a lack of common sense.

Fees & payments should be fair and reasonable. Not outright rape!
Quote:
Actually I see the content owners who are responsible for killing the DVR market.

Killing the non MSO DVR market as in cable company supplied/leased/rented DVRs.
post #87 of 93
Thread Starter 
This patent filed in 1993 and granted in 2002 (10 years later) goes into very interesting detail with reference to "TV Guide". Unknown if it was just a general term or if they were referring the "TV Guide" themselves;
http://www.google.com/patents?id=UOw...0guide&f=false

But, I maybe found what I was looking for here. Filed in 1994 and granted in 1995;
http://www.google.com/patents/US5479...GfL06AG338zhCA
Quote:
Screen (10) for a user interface of a television schedule system and process consists of an array (24) of irregular cells (26), which vary in length, corresponding to different television program lengths of one half hour to one-and-one half hours or more. The array is arranged as three columns (28) of one-half hour in duration, and twelve rows (30) of program listings.

Another filed in 1997 and granted in 2000;
http://www.google.com/patents/US6061...GfL06AG338zhCA
Quote:
The program guide system displays a program guide grid on a user's television equipment. The grid contains rows of television program listings for various channels. Columns in the grid are associated with the scheduled start times of the listed programs. The grid also contains non-program listings. Non-program listings rows contain selectable non-program options, such as options related to weather or sports information. The user can select a given one of the selectable non-program options by positioning a highlight region on one of the options and pressing an appropriate key on a remote control. When the system receives the corresponding command from the remote control, the system displays additional information for the selected non-program option on the user's display screen.

Note the term "grid" used. This company 'United Video Properties' appears to have more patents under this category than anyone else.
LL
LL
post #88 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooper View Post

That doesn't explain a lack of common sense.

If you expect common sense from the government, you are living in the wrong universe. I know people at the PTO (not in software, but pharmaceuticals), and they do the best they can, but they are subject to the stupid rules congress wrote and the stupid findings by the courts. It is an imperfect system, but I don't see Tivo as a especially evil for using it to stay in business.
post #89 of 93
Thread Starter 
Now for Gemstar, I find this that appears to be the earliest (so far) of their EPG patents. Filed in 2000, granted in 2004;
http://www.google.com/patents/US6756...GfL06AG338zhCA
Quote:
The present invention is an improvement over previous Electronic Programming Guides ("EPG")
post #90 of 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

Fees & payments should be fair and reasonable. Not outright rape!.

So, what is reasonable? Dish used to charge DVR customers $5 per unit per month for DVRs. If they theoretically have 5 million units deployed based on ~50% penetration at the time of the settlement, that is $25 million per month in DVR revenue. The court cases went on for years. It is easy to get to huge amounts of lost patent licensing revenue pretty quick. That is just one example. You can be outraged all you want, but it isn't Tivo you should be outraged at IMHO, unless of course you are the one having to pay the settlements.

-Ted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Recorders
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Recorders › Lawsuit happy TiVo, program guides & countersuits. TiVo just sell your product & stop your greed.