What is Digg?131 Comments
- DVRDude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29Add a zero to that 10.
- fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+31The *really* sad thing is that computer recording of video is trivially obvious. Both the patent system and the judiciary are packed to the gills with idiots and sophists.
I don't doubt that Dish will make a deal; I have both HD and standard DVRs from Dish in my media systems and you can bet they aren't interested in losing the income from me, and from other Dish customers. I have literally no use for television without DVR capability. I won't stand for commercials, I require time shifting to fit the shows I am interested in into my schedule and my family's schedule, I require the ability to pause when something else comes along (phone call, potty break, whatever) and I very much enjoy the ability to go back and re-view something when I miss dialog or want to see something in detail. It's either DVR or DVD. Period. I'm not going back to the stone age.
I'm sure TiVo's stock will go up tomorrow; I'm just as sure that Dish's stock will hit rock bottom if they don't deal. - Buckets, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18"Subtract an "n" to that permnanent."
Replace that "to" with a from. - knupso, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Patent law really needs some changes.
- Feanor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14"The *really* sad thing is that computer recording of video is trivially obvious. Both the patent system and the judiciary are packed to the gills with idiots and sophists."
While I agree that the patent system needs some serious reformations to get it to a point of feasibility, I have to disagree with you on this first point. It may seem to you now that computer recording of video is obvious, but when TiVo came out it was quite revolutionary. - Dhalgren, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I love my MythTV system. However, if my parents asked me what DVR they should get, I would tell them to buy a TiVo...
- adam84a, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15"The *really* sad thing is that computer recording of video is trivially obvious. Both the patent system and the judiciary are packed to the gills with idiots and sophists."
I think the reason that TiVo went after and won this case is because they initially were working with EchoStar on a joint-created DVR a long time ago, before EchoStar backed out and used many of the features that they had created together for the DVR. The sad thing is thinking that TiVo would have anything to do with the ugly, slow, all around craptacular DVRs that Dish pushes on it's customers (I put up with them for a year before switching back to a TiVo). - Anth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Correction: 90M due to TiVo from E*
- DVRDude, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Both TiVo and EchoStar have put out press releases this AM. E* says existing customers shouldn't worry and they will appeal. If it were me, I would worry and would switch to DTV who has a non-suit agreement with TiVo through 2010.
http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2006-08/tivo-v-echostar-the-morning-after/ - joebruin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Dish says they got a stay and are appealing.
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=68854&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=897186&highlight= - sbiller, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I expect we will see a huge jump in TiVo stock tomorrow.
- trvr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8for those who want to know the models of the Dish DVR that this affects:
DP-501, DP-508, DP-510, DP-522, DP-625, DP-721, DP-921, DP-942 - skor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7TKDWILSON : If anyone could have thought of it, why didn't they think of it before Tivo? All inventions are things someone thought of that anyone else could have thought of, but didn't.
- info, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6OK... everybody relax...
EchoStar Communications Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH) issued the following statement regarding recent developments in theTivo 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 issuedby 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."
http://www.wams.de/appl/newsticker2/index.php?channel=fin&module=smarthouse&id=423677
;-) - NJank, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8dude, relax. EchoStar directly used technology they knew was developed by Tivo, with the direct intent of producing a competing product, and paying no licensing fees for the use of the developed technology. It seems pretty clear cut. Anyone who developed anything on their own, they should be safe.
- adam84a, on 10/12/2007, -14/+20Yay for a reasonable ruling that allows a company to protect their vital patents.
- NJank, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Since no one wants to read the actual patent/claims of infringement, here's the summary. E-star infringed on specific hardware implementations of a DVR-type invention, seeming to specifically focus on the simultaneous recording and playback of media, which hadn't been successfully implemented prior to that time. (yes, it was novel. no, they didn't say 'we're recording TV on a hard disk, so no one else can 'cause we patented it first.')
Link to the patent:
"Multimedia time warping system", filed 1998
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6233389.html
court document mentions that the violated claims were:
1: A process for the simultaneous storage and play back of multimedia data, comprising the steps of (list of steps).
5: The process of claim 1, wherein the storing and extracting of said video and audio components from said storage device are performed simultaneously.
21: The process of claim 1, wherein said storage device is connected to said Media Switch.
23: The process of claim 1, wherein said Media Switch is implemented in hardware
31: A process for the simultaneous storage and play back of multimedia data, comprising the steps of: (alternative method steps).
32: An apparatus for the simultaneous storage and play back of multimedia data, comprising (describes specific physical components from input to output)
36: The apparatus of claim 32, wherein the storing and extracting of said video and audio components from said storage device are performed simultaneously.
52: The apparatus of claim 32, wherein said storage device is connected to said Media Switch.
61: An apparatus for the simultaneous storage and play back of multimedia data, comprising (alternative physical component structure) - KicktheDonkey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Dumb-assess...
It's not simply the act of 'recording' that was the infringement part.
It's the implementation of simultaneously recording AND playing back. - raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6TiVo went to Echostar years ago looking to license their technology, they even left a demo TiVo unit with them so they could see what it could do. Echostar reportedly "lost" this demo unit. Echostar decided to not work with TiVo (not license it).
Fast forward a year or so and Echostar releases new DishPVRs with TiVo technology in it, while they still sucked compared to an acutal TiVo they were MUCH improved over the previous PVRs that Echostar had.
Echostar also started lying to it's customers, both in telling them that the DishPVR was "the same as" a TiVo and in telling them that a TiVo would not work with Dish network.
If you were TiVo what would you have done? - symbha, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So it's add a 0 to that 10 million, and subtract 10 million?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Federal Court stayed decision of TX court.
- cutmaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I agree, only because when I go over my moms house and I see the VCR time blinking 12:00 due to the last power outage.(5 weeks ago) I couldn't imagine them trying to working with a computer.
- fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"seeming to specifically focus on the simultaneous recording and playback of media, which hadn't been successfully implemented prior to that time. (yes, it was novel..."
Wrong on all counts. Any tape recorder (audio OR video) with both a playback head and a record head did this with a constant, but quite minimal, delay. Prior to that, any tape recorder with a record head that had monitoring of he record signal prior to the addition of the bias signal had it with absolute temporal concurrency. As of 1985, when the first available to the consumer computer with pre-emptive, real-time multitasking that handled video came out (the Amiga), simultaneous recording and playback of audio and video streams in smaller chunks, but via essentially the same mechanisms, was available to the consumer almost immediately, and WELL prior to TiVo. Ham radio SSTV implemented all manner of variations on these themes as well; AEA had a unit on the market (the AEA "AVT") that not only could record, play back, schedule and switch channels, modes and methods, but could also manipulate the image stream in the process. The first of those systems was marketed even earlier, the CMJ-TU by a company out of Florida that used the Radio Shack Color Computer as the recording/playback engine. That dates all the way back to the 1970's. I still have one.
The patent office is staffed with technologically ignorant drones who wouldn't know a true innovation if it bit them directly on the nose. *That* is one of the patent offices most pervasive problems. That's been a problem for many years. Not to say it's the only problem, of course -- incredibly stupid things like allowing software to be patented have compounded these issues many-fold, and continue to retard progress, the *exact* opposite of what the whole process is supposed to do.
But you know what? The root problem is the same with all government operations. No one has to make a profit, no one has to take responsibility, no one has to own up to anything. Every time we allow the government to manage a facet of our society, we get stupider, slower, and less productive. Information society, my aching ass. - NJank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4ummm.. how the heck can they fix the hardware in the field, when the problem is the hardware design used in the unit in the field? is a tech going to come to my house, open the box, and replace some components? you can't just push a software fix for this one...
- ClassicJBC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5As much as I love TiVo now, I think they're both polishing the brass on the Titanic anyway. In a few years, we should see content providers offering direct downloads, much as they're already offering streaming content.
And, of course, no one mentions the best choice--a PC box running MythTV. - kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12MythTV for the win
- NJank, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7@noGoodnamesleft:
and that's just wonderful for you. I guess it's a good thing for them that THAT ISN'T WHAT THEY PATENTED. Read the patents, not just the usually vague titles. They patented a particular hardware implementation for simultaneously recording and playing a media stream. Echostar used the patented design without license. done.
Did you come up with that first too? You should have patented it. You'd be getting the 100mil from echostar. - cutmaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5My thoughts "Knoppmyth"
- daigakuinsei, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This article mentions "TiVo's "time warp" patent that allows viewers to pause, rewind or fast-forward live TV." Makes it sound like the issue is live tv features rather than recording shows to watch later.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/tech/article/0,2777,DRMN_23910_4721859,00.html910_4720654,00.html - adam84a, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Yeah, it was meant as a joke
- daigakuinsei, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That's like unplugging your pc from the internet to avoid WGA.
Yeah, I could always unplug it, give up, and get a tivo. Rather not, though, if there's a way around it. - stubles81, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I will be pissed off if I loose my Dish DVR, I love that thing
- eddieo, on 10/12/2007, -14/+17"Add a zero to that 10"
Subtract an "n" to that permnanent. - andy3000, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Thank god!
If it's not a TiVo, it's a cheap knock-off with a terrible interface. I can't stand it when people think their generic DVR is just as good. TiVo deserves recognition for its innovations. - NJank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3oh, and so they can charge some people $5/month for not having it hooked up to the phone line. :)
I think I remember an option somewhere in the setup screens for whether it automatically downloads/installs software updates, or if it requires a prompt first. switching that to prompt as soon as i get home. - skyhighrockets, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Looks like Tivo is going to stick around after all.
- NJank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3or pay more for your current one? Most plans they charge an extra $5/month for the "DVR functionality", and for most people the hardware was free (install deals, etc.) How much would the license have to up the monthly before people find it easier to switch to a different option?
- fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"It may seem to you now that computer recording of video is obvious, but when TiVo came out it was quite revolutionary."
No. It wasn't. Video recording (and playback, and pause, and editing) were all features of many software packages available on the Amiga, for instance, almost as far back as 1985; I was writing software to do exactly that in 1987. And before that, audio and SSTV (Hams were "tivo-ing" SSTV *years* prior to any of this, BTW), the same. All TiVo represents is a hardware implementation of *some* of those capabilities for the consumer, and yes, that includes scheduling and automatic triggering and more. Not all of those features by any means (I can trivially do stuff to video at home that TiVo hasn't ever thought of letting a consumer do, for instance.) Is the set of features that a TiVo represents useful? Sure. Absolutely. Inventive? Not in any fundamental sense. Just creative feature packaging, greatly helped along by the decreasing price curve of the hardware required to perform the task, with a little (and I mean LITTLE) bit of scheduling (also an area totally covered by deep, deep prior art) thrown in to help. No more than that.
The very idea that TiVo had *anything* to do with "inventing" computer recording and manipulation of an image and/or audio stream (in any form) is utterly ridiculous. I can understand that the average consumer isn't aware that video recording and subsequent manipulation by computer (and other hardware) was already out there; what I don't accept is that the patent office (apparently) wasn't aware that the prior art (patented and otherwise) wholly contained all the important ideas before TiVo or any other "DVR" like product ever hatched. As a video guy *and* an engineer, I can tell you flatly that this stuff was old news on TiVo's day #1.
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the fact is, just because *you* hadn't heard of a particular use of technology, doesn't mean that it hasn't been out there. And in fact, that's OK, because you're not a patent examiner. I know because it is my field and I've been working in it since the early 1970's, and frankly, I *should* know. But for a patent examiner to not be aware of prior art... well, that's a major part of what they're supposed to be there to do. If they can't do it, then they should be working at McDonalds, not awarding patent rights.
I'll give you a concrete example. My company put the first morphing package on any desktop PC based on experimental code we had written in 1987. This was a commercial effort, not in any way associated with Wohlberg. In the late 1990s, we got a call from a patent examiner doing their job, asking us some basic questions about the timing of our actual product releases that included morphing capability, how that was documented, etc. Why? Because some whackyass was trying to patent morphing *years* after the fact. They got their clock cleaned, and that's how it should be. That's exactly what patent examiners should do. If they had done so in this case, a TiVo would be no more patentable than would the next computer with today's variation of recording software, regardless of the target audience. But they didn't, and so we have the current situation. - NJank, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3ummm... what open source alternative are you aware of that infringed on the patent by implementing a specific hardware implementation for simultaneously recording and playing media? Oh, none? good.
(read the patent, this has nothing to do with software. it's a device patent) - legendxx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Unplugging the phone line does nothing. E* will never dial your receiver.. ever. The only thing the phone line is for is so that the recvr can report pay-per-view and other charges you order with your remote.
- badogg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I have DishDVR and my Brother in Law has Tivo with DTV. I have to admit, there is really no comparison. Tivo has some really neat features, so maybe if Dish ends up shutting down the DVR thingy, the boss (wife) will let me move to DTV+Tivo. :)
- stevers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5http://www.duggmirror.com/tech_news/TiVo_wins_permnanent_injunction_against_EchoStar_DVR/
- NJank, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5dude, if you can patent a specific hardware implementation for going to the bathroom that no one else has come up with before, go ahead, you may get rich.
They didn't patent digital recording of TV. They patented a hardware implementation that Echostar knowingly used without license.
I'm a Dish DVR user, and even I admit this was the right ruling. They better come up with a licensing agreement, or I'll be switching. - DVRDude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Digg + slashdot killed me. I'm on the phone with tech support now. Once I'm back up, you may want to check out the actual court document which is kinda cool.
- NJank, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4ok, let's think this through.
echostar stole tivo's design, sold a product based on it, and is collecting monthly revenue from it. Tivo said 'knock it off, stop using our stuff without paying for it'. The judge said, "you're right. sorry guys. looks like you all basically bought stolen goods. you must stop using it unless Tivo says otherwise."
Tivo could say:
(a)"well, in the interest of not pissing off people who aren't paying us anything, let them keep using the hardware, just don't sell any more please without a license." to which echostar would reply "ok, we have newer equipment available anyway, we'll just start selling only those instead. Goodbye. You get no more money from us, thanks."
or
(b) "they're using our illegally obtained technology. We should be getting license fees/royalties on that. echostar profits by keeping them working in the field. by ordering them to stop functioning, customers are going to be angry with DishNetwork. BUT they love their DVR's, so they'll look for another DVR option. We're one of those options, making this a potential revenue stream. OR, Dish might buckle under the potential financial impact of mod'ing/implementing an alternative and losing subscribers, etc, that they'll just come to us for a license agreement. either way involves us getting paid for the stuff we invented."
which would you choose. DishDVR people aren't going to get pissed at Tivo, they'll be pissed at Dish (rightfully so). - trod13, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Frecken Dish better make a deal w/ Tivo because I don't want to get rid of my DVR one single bit.
- daigakuinsei, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Any ideas about hacking DVR to prevent updates from dishnetwork that would disable its functionality?
- kaddar, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7010 million?
//bash.org quote 6231 - raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Nobody likes the grammar/spelling Nazi's
- junkfood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Permanent just isn't what it used to be. Another court has already granted an injunction.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 131 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is