# Alternate Sources for TiVo Programming Data



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

Would it be possible to receive TiVo's programming guide info from a source other than TiVo? If the source doesn't exist now, is it something that could be created?


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

No


----------



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

Why would it be impossible to create one?


----------



## StanSimmons (Jun 10, 2000)

It isn't impossible, but theft of service is not allowed to be discussed on this board.


----------



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

Okay. Then my next question is, Why is it considered theft of service?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Ratboy said:


> Okay. Then my next question is, Why is it considered theft of service?


Are you looking for alternate source of Guide data so you do not have to pay the monthly subscription fee to TiVo?


----------



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

I'm curious whether it's possible. I can understand that it would be theft of service if some copied TiVo's data and reposted it elsewhere for others to use, but what if someone created their own guide from scratch that was TiVo compatible.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Ratboy said:


> I'm curious whether it's possible. I can understand that it would be theft of service if some copied TiVo's data and reposted it elsewhere for others to use, but what if someone created their own guide from scratch that was TiVo compatible.


again, if you are looking to use a TiVo but not pay the monthly sub price then it is considered theft of service. Not many forums will hel;p you with that


----------



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

I'd appreciate it if you'd explain why it's "Theft" of service. I understand and respect that this forum doesn't want to share the information, but is using an alternative programming guide actually illegal? And if it is, why? Thanks.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

Ratboy said:


> I'd appreciate it if you'd explain why it's "Theft" of service. I understand and respect that this forum doesn't want to share the information, but is using an alternative programming guide actually illegal? And if it is, why? Thanks.


TiVo provides more that program guide information when your TiVo calls home, TiVo provides software upgrades and gets information from your TiVo for use by ZIP code that they sell. Without hacking the TiVo to receive its information from another web source how would get the information into the TiVo, and why would you want to...so you would not pay TiVo any money for the service ? After 30 days of not calling home the TiVo will lock up, after that you can't record anything..only watch what you already recorded and use the trick TV watching. If your aim is to pay TiVo but use another source for the program information, why would TiVo want to expend the effort to allow that for a very few customers.


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

Ratboy said:


> I'd appreciate it if you'd explain why it's "Theft" of service. I understand and respect that this forum doesn't want to share the information, but is using an alternative programming guide actually illegal? And if it is, why? Thanks.


My view is that it's perfectly fine to use an alternate programming guide on TiVo hardware. You just can't use any of the other TiVo software. Use of any TiVo software without a subscription is "theft of service" unless TiVo specifically allows it. You don't own the software.

Note that as far as I know, nobody has ever been able to usefully use a TiVo (as a DVR) without TiVo software. There are just too many proprietary hardware pieces involved that TiVo has written custom drivers for.

So until you can demonstrate that you can do what no one else has managed to do, your intended use of an alternative programming guide implies intended theft of service.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

I agree--I don't know that use of alternate, legally-obtained programming info. with a TIVO unit would be any sort of wrongful use. I mean, one can continue using the unit and its existing software after a subscription has run out (albeit, with very limited functionality). I have to add, though, that I haven't re-read the TIVO license, although my hunch is that it does not say that one must continue paying the subscription fee to use the unit.

I can envision that a software group of aficionados could devise software to be placed onto a TIVO box that would add functionality to a non-subscripted TIVO unit. And then, if there was free, publicly-available program guide info., to make use of that. I have a Sony VCR (remember those?!?) that gets free over-the-air program guide info. from the good folks at Gemstar/TV Guide; I wonder if there would be anything illegal about capturing those airwaves. (This unit was a great idea, by the way, that never caught on big time; a TIVO-type precursor (don't laugh--my non-tech. mother and father could use the program guide without any problem!) in the VCR world, at least in terms of ease of use.)

Now, _this_ would be an interesting project for an open software group ... (This has been tried of-sorts successfully in other realms, most specifically in the digitial audio player field with free alternate software having been created, all legally done.)


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

yep - it is using the software unsubscribed that would be the "theft of service" and what TiVo would use from TOS to shutdown any group they thought was impacting actual subscriptions.

completely wiping out the software on the TiVo and starting over with your own is probably outside the realm of the TOS and thus legally doable


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Ratboy said:


> I'd appreciate it if you'd explain why it's "Theft" of service. I understand and respect that this forum doesn't want to share the information, but is using an alternative programming guide actually illegal? And if it is, why? Thanks.


The question in reverse is why do you want to do this? Your answer to this will then determine what types of responses you get to your question.


----------



## TolloNodre (Nov 3, 2007)

If you're looking for an open source alternative to Tivo, try MythTV:
http://www.mythtv.org/

And you can use Schedules Direct with MythTV for your guide data:
http://www.schedulesdirect.org/

Probably a lot better than trying to break the law or your terms of service agreement.


----------



## reneg (Jun 19, 2002)

SchedulesDirect is not free either.


----------



## TolloNodre (Nov 3, 2007)

reneg said:


> SchedulesDirect is not free either.


The OP never said anything about 'free'...that's what the other posters assumed.


----------



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

astrohip said:


> The question in reverse is why do you want to do this? Your answer to this will then determine what types of responses you get to your question.


My question in this is based on my interest in inducement prizes. I thought that if it's possible (and legal) it'd be an interesting challenge to post over on the site BigCarrot.com.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Ratboy said:


> My question in this is based on my interest in inducement prizes. I thought that if it's possible (and legal) it'd be an interesting challenge to post over on the site BigCarrot.com.


this would not be a good challenge to submit


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

It is technically possible to feed the TiVo an alternative guide data. It is done in parts of the world where TiVo doesn't offer service. The rub is that the TiVo needs authorized to use that data and to enable recording features, not simply the presence of guide data, and that authorization can only come from TiVo as part of a paid account. 

If you are looking to do this as an alternative to paying TiVo the service fee (especially in an market which TiVo offers service), rather than because TiVo does not supply the guide data you need, that would be theft of services.


----------



## dtreese (May 6, 2005)

ZeoTiVo said:


> completely wiping out the software on the TiVo and starting over with your own is probably outside the realm of the TOS and thus legally doable


Of course it's legally doable. You own the hardware, and you can cut the box into slices and attempt to use it as toilet paper if you wish (SCRATCHY!). I just have no idea why anyone would want to waste a TiVo.


----------



## hastypete (Oct 2, 2007)

I guess this is a matter of opinion.
If I own the hardware, I can do what I want with it. Period.
Now, if I'm trying to get guide data from TiVo without paying. That IS theft.
Of course there may be some clause in the TOS that says otherwise, but have you actually read a ToS. Everyone is breaking the law at some point. It is impossible not to the way those things are written. It is legallese meant to confound the wisest person.
Just because someone puts something in a TOS doesn't mean it will hold up in a court of law.

BTW, this in no way implies I'm in favor of doing this. For me, I like the service just fine. But I do defend the rights of people to do what they will with what they own.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

hastypete said:


> But I do defend the rights of people to do what they will with what they own.


The TOS clearly states you do not own the software. It is not stealing the guide data from TiVo that is being diuscussed - it is using the full functionality of the software in the DVR from TiVo without entering into a subscription plan.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

hastypete said:


> I guess this is a matter of opinion.
> If I own the hardware, I can do what I want with it. Period.
> Now, if I'm trying to get guide data from TiVo without paying. That IS theft.
> Of course there may be some clause in the TOS that says otherwise, but have you actually read a ToS. Everyone is breaking the law at some point. It is impossible not to the way those things are written. It is legallese meant to confound the wisest person.
> ...


It would require more than software modification as you would need to replace the eprom. After doing all that you end up with a highly optimized piece of low end hardware that you will probably never be able to find any software to run on because of the hardware limitations.


----------



## qz3fwd (Jul 6, 2007)

Technically I think Tivo only owns part of the software, not including the kernel.
Hopefully tivo will be forced to adopt the gpl3 and stop preveting others from loading custom software on the box, as they have currently tivoized the OS they took from others.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

qz3fwd said:


> Technically I think Tivo only owns part of the software, not including the kernel.
> Hopefully tivo will be forced to adopt the gpl3 and stop preveting others from loading custom software on the box, as they have currently tivoized the OS they took from others.


TiVo can never be forced to adopt the GPL v3 because of the version of the GPL of the kernel they currently use allows them to continue to use it under the current license.


----------



## kb7oeb (Jan 18, 2005)

Theft of service is the wrong term, you would have to be getting guide data from tivo without paying them. I'm sure its a violation of the tivo software license to use it without subscribing though.

I can't think of a legal reason you couldn't run your own software on the tivo hardware though.

It's mostly philosophical though , there is a lot of great free software out there that runs on commodity pc hardware. I don't think its worth the effort to try and use tivo hardware without tivo service.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

kb7oeb said:


> It's mostly philosophical though , there is a lot of great free software out there that runs on commodity pc hardware.


TiVos are highly optimized pieces of hardware that do not even meet the minimum requirements of most operating systems including many linux distributions.


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

There is no such thing as "theft of services." This is a made-up term. The term "theft of services" only applies to criminal actions for actually stealing another person's services. It has no applicability whatsoever for using a computer device for its intended purpose.

I have paid for my Tivo. It is a piece of hardware that came with installed software. It is not illegal to use hardware and software that I have purchased as I see fit. This is fair use.

I would be more than happy to do without Tivo "updates." These have lately become nothing more than an opportunity for Tivo to find additional ways to "monetize" the Tivo experience and push more advertisements on you. 

(By the way, I happen to be an intellectual property attorney with many years of litigation experience. If you disagree with me, please cite a specific law that says that it is "theft of services" to program a hardware device to receive different program information. Otherwise, please stop acting like Tivo's lapdog.)


----------



## fred22 (Nov 11, 2007)

RobertJ and others:

I was just talking with a friend who is somewhat interested in Tivo but wants to know what the monthly fee supposedly covers? I suspected that it was the Guide but this conversation leads me to believe that it may be continued use of the "operating software."

We discussed the fact that you buy the box and it comes with software. I own something but what? I wanted to understand why features that are enabled would stop working if a monthly fee was not tendered. Why shouldn't I be able to still be able to view MY photos and listen to my MP3's by sharing from my computer to my purchased Tivo. Why would a monthly subscription be required to continue those services that no longer require dealing with Tivo. Then again, maybe I did enter some agreement that would terminate.

Of course, I don't recall signing any contract but then I don't sign any contract for most of the software I have purchased (or is that leased) for my computer. Breaking the seal seems to "sign" the contract.

Stuff to ponder but my friend is not currently going to join the Tivo family.


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

Fred22,

Tivo is free to charge monthly fees for services, such as program guide information. Tivo is also free to do its best to block you from using another source for program guide information.

However, this does not mean that I am required to pay Tivo at least if I am (or your friend is) getting this information from another source.

The problem is that Tivo is attempting to subsidize the cost of the hardware by making the hardware really cheap, but then tacking on monthly fees. This is like GM selling you a new car for only $3,000, but then saying it is "theft of services" to use the car unless you buy a new oil change every month from an authorized GM Goodwrench dealer. GM is free to sell me a car for only $3,000, but it is illegal for GM to attempt to tie that car purchase to a monthly oil change.

The short answer is that the enforceability of these EULA-type agreements is complicated. The long answer is that it is not a crime, much less "theft of services," to purchase hardware and then use that hardware for different purposes. It is very difficult for companies to enforce these EULAs in court, and even if they can do so successfully, it is only a civil offense (i.e., they can only sue you for damages, not throw you in jail.)

I used to be more sympathetic to Tivo. I have a Series 1 with a lifetime subscription (since 2000), plus a newer Series 3 with a lifetime subscription (since last year). Now that Tivo has decided that I am just another set of eyeballs for viewing their advertisements, however, they can bite my shiny metal ass.

Note: this is not legal advice, particularly the "bite my shiny metal ass" part.


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

RobertJ said:


> There is no such thing as "theft of services." This is a made-up term. The term "theft of services" only applies to criminal actions for actually stealing another person's services. It has no applicability whatsoever for using a computer device for its intended purpose.
> 
> I have paid for my Tivo. It is a piece of hardware that came with installed software. It is not illegal to use hardware and software that I have purchased as I see fit. This is fair use.
> 
> ...


Yes, I think we can tell you might be a lawyer. You changed the claims here to suit your purposes, rather than what was actually said. Can you cite anyone in this thread (a much easier search) who "says that it is "theft of services" to program a hardware device to receive different program information."

The issue is changing TiVo's software. You do not own that software.

The service agreement that you agreed to states, among other things:


> 16. Title to Software and Intellectual Property. You may need to use certain software programs in your TiVo DVR to use or have full access to certain features of the TiVo service. You received certain software in your TiVo DVR at the time of purchase and other software programs may be delivered to your TiVo DVR by TiVo from time to time, which you are obligated to accept. You may use such software solely in executable code form and solely in conjunction with your TiVo DVR. Your use of such software is subject to the terms of this Agreement. TiVo retains title to and ownership of all the software for the TiVo DVR and certain intellectual property rights in the TiVo DVR.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

RobertJ said:


> There is no such thing as "theft of services." This is a made-up term. The term "theft of services" only applies to criminal actions for actually stealing another person's services. It has no applicability whatsoever for using a computer device for its intended purpose.
> 
> I have paid for my Tivo. It is a piece of hardware that came with installed software. It is not illegal to use hardware and software that I have purchased as I see fit. This is fair use.


except that you did not purcahse the software. there are many software use business models. TiVo has made some proprietary software under the work of their own employees. The only open source software they have truly modified is the kernel itself and that was really just to take out anything not needed specifically for DVR application. So even the open source cries of Tivoization is a big red herring since TiVo has a lot of PATENTED software on the box.

So there are terms of SERVICE that say you lease the software from TiVo and must have an agreement in place (read subscription) to use it legally. If you use any part of the PATENTED, proprietary software without following the terms of _service_ then that is theft of _service _. Specifically the software service on the TiVo DVR.

I am appalled an IP lawyer would not understand the various software use and licensing models.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

kb7oeb said:


> Theft of service is the wrong term, you would have to be getting guide data from tivo without paying them. I'm sure its a violation of the tivo software license to use it without subscribing though.
> 
> I can't think of a legal reason you couldn't run your own software on the tivo hardware though.


Theft of service is the correct term, for the purposes and policies of this board (at least was under Mr. Bott's ownership). The service in question is enabling the recording features of the TiVo software.

Directly in a strictly legal sense, no laws are being broken, just implicit contracts, and most.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

It is not law itself, but contractual law which permits TiVo Inc to obligate you subscribe to the service to enable software features.

TiVo has simply decided that certain features are available to paying customers, as is there right, and this board honors that by considering those features the service, and enabling such features without subscription "theft" of that service, since you are depriving TiVo of just earned revenue for those features. 

If you don't like that model, you are free to take that up with TiVo Inc, seek support form another forum that does support essentially stealing TiVos "service" (which there aren't many), or seek another hardware/software product with terms that do suit your needs.


----------



## Ratboy (Nov 25, 2001)

Reading the TiVo Service Agreement, I section 12 caught my eye:


> *12. Using the TiVo Service.* You may access and use the TiVo service only with a TiVo DVR that is authorized to receive the TiVo service and you agree not to tamper with or otherwise modify your TiVo DVR. Among other things, this means that you may access and use the program guide information only on a TiVo DVR that is authorized to receive it. The TiVo service is provided for your personal, non- commercial use, and may not be resold, in whole or in part. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, you may not transfer the TiVo service. By using the TiVo service, you agree to receive all software updates and upgrades that TiVo sends to your TiVo DVR. _If your TiVo DVR accesses the TiVo service (regardless of your payment or subscription status), you acknowledge and agree that you are a user of the TiVo service and are bound by the terms of this Agreement._[Emphasis mine]


That would seem to imply to me that one can do whatever one wants with the box as long as one's not accessing the TiVo Service.

For the record, I own a Series 3 with a lifetime subscription.


----------



## Atomike (Jun 12, 2005)

> If you don't like that model, you are free to take that up with TiVo Inc, seek support form another forum that does support essentially stealing TiVos "service" (which there aren't many), or seek another hardware/software product with terms that do suit your needs.


In your response, you are assuming your conclusion (i.e. that recording shows without using Tivo's guide data is stealing). This is the crux of the debate. You can't just assume that. Then you try to say he can't even debate that here. Hello -this is not your forum. He's perfectly welcome here. 
This topic is certainly open for debate. To say he must go somewhere else even to discuss it, is wildly opposed to the purpose of forums.

Personally, I think I come down closest to ZeoTivo's opinion. The hardware is yours to use however you wish without limit, but the software may be a little different. But I welcome all opinions, and think they should be able to speak here.


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

Atomike said:


> In your response, you are assuming your conclusion (i.e. that recording shows without using Tivo's guide data is stealing). This is the crux of the debate. You can't just assume that. Then you try to say he can't even debate that here. Hello -this is not your forum. He's perfectly welcome here.
> This topic is certainly open for debate. To say he must go somewhere else even to discuss it, is wildly opposed to the purpose of forums.
> 
> Personally, I think I come down closest to ZeoTivo's opinion. The hardware is yours to use however you wish without limit, but the software may be a little different. But I welcome all opinions, and think they should be able to speak here.


Hello - Have you actually read the forum's rules (right there in a sticky post you can see every time you come to this forum)? 


> RULES:
> 
> 1. No discussion of Theft of services. That includes TiVo, DirectTV, CableTV or theft of any other service.
> 
> 2. No discussion of hacked TiVo software versions that allows Theft of Services. Even if the discussion is not about theft, since these hacked versions allow the possibility of theft, discussions about it is not permitted.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

astrohip said:


> The question in reverse is why do you want to do this? Your answer to this will then determine what types of responses you get to your question.


I'd kinda like to do it myself, just to clean up the junk -- like ten+ channels of "Local Origination", when actual schedules or, at a minimum, channel names are readily available, just not from Tribune.

But only kinda. I'm not about to do the necessary work.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

fred22 said:


> RobertJ and others:
> 
> I was just talking with a friend who is somewhat interested in Tivo but wants to know what the monthly fee supposedly covers? I suspected that it was the Guide but this conversation leads me to believe that it may be continued use of the "operating software."
> 
> ...


It is an interesting legal question about you owning the hardware and the software that comes on it, does TiVo have the right to shut down a TiVo that has no sub ? If you are paying for the guide data you would expect that you can't get that data without paying but I don't know if locking down the TiVo itself after 30 days would hold up in court (if anybody has the money to take them to court for such a small gain). If you rented the TiVo as you do a cable box the question is easy, stop paying your rent the cable co can lock up your cable box, but when you own your own hardware (TiVo box) how far can TiVo or any co go with locking up hardware you own without a sub ? In the extreme TiVo could set up the TiVo so after some time (of no sub) the box would break itself never to be used again.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Ratboy said:


> Reading the TiVo Service Agreement, I section 12 caught my eye:
> 
> That would seem to imply to me that one can do whatever one wants with the box as long as one's not accessing the TiVo Service.
> 
> For the record, I own a Series 3 with a lifetime subscription.


yes but the TiVo service is defined in that same document as in part some of the key features of the software on the box. So when you say box, if you mean just the hardware then you are correct. But to get guide data from another source and and then hack the box to to use the TiVo software features with the other guide data and not pay TiVo - then that is Theft of Service.


> *3.* The TiVo Service.The TiVo service consists of program guide information *and* the following features: _(a) Season Pass™ - automatically finds and records every episode of a series all season long; (b) WishList® - finds and records programs that feature your favorite actor, director, team or even topic; (c) Smart Recording - automatically detects program line-up changes for your cable/satellite provider and adjusts recording times so you don't have to worry about the details; (d) TiVo Suggestions - TiVo can be programmed to suggest and auto-record programs that may match your interests; and (e) Parental Controls _- lock channels or set ratings limits based on content. Each of these features is part of the "TiVo service." The "TiVo service" means these features and any additional features and functionality of the TiVo DVR that TiVo may, at its discretion and from time to time, offer.


so yes by contract - TiVo has the right to shutdown these key features if you are in default of a service contract. Notice that trick play and the live TV buffer are not noted in the definition. So in effect TiVo is letting the hardware do its thing whether you have a subscription or not.

now ther is a nuance of - if you use some other guide data like wmcbrine points out could be useful (read QAM channel mapping as well) AND pay TiVo a subscription fee... Is that a viaolation of the Terms of Service?


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

CrispyCritter said:


> Hello - Have you actually read the forum's rules (right there in a sticky post you can see every time you come to this forum)?


Are you suggesting that it's a breach of forum rules to disagree on a legal basis as to what constitutes "theft of services"? We are not providing instructions on how to hack a Tivo. We are disagreeing with your legal conclusion as to what constitutes "theft" (i.e., alleged breach of contract).


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

Ratboy said:


> Reading the TiVo Service Agreement, I section 12 caught my eye:
> 
> That would seem to imply to me that one can do whatever one wants with the box as long as one's not accessing the TiVo Service.
> 
> For the record, I own a Series 3 with a lifetime subscription.


You're absolutely right. Note that this document specifically defines "Tivo Service" as meaning certain functions within the Tivo (season pass, wish list, etc.) under Section 3. It does not say that "you cannot use the Tivo under any circumstances unless you subscribe."

A consumer also don't necessarily even need to accept these terms and conditions at all. Someone could potentially just buy a Tivo box and use it as they see fit, without accepting the terms of the license agreement. (I.e., without "phoning home" to Tivo or using Tivo services in any way.) Or they could terminate the license agreement, as in Paragraph 15. It's not copyright infringement or "theft" of any sort just to use preinstalled software that comes with hardware I purchase.

(There is an interesting question about whether such use would be patent infringement, but that is incredibly complicated and depends on the particular patents.)

I agree fully that it would be wrong to hack the Tivo box to steal program data _from Tivo_ without paying for it. But that's not what's being asked here.


----------



## erikg (Aug 20, 2007)

I thought the whole reason of buying a Tivo, is for the Tivo software. If you want to feed the tivo different data (ie. guide data) build yourself a Windows Media Center box or a MythTv box. Why spend 250$ at all. When you buy the box you are buying the service the box is just the means of accessing that data (well storage too and tuning.... ). I probably missed the whole point of this... oh well.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

RobertJ said:


> Now that Tivo has decided that I am just another set of eyeballs for viewing their advertisements, however, they can bite my shiny metal ass.


D*mn. I almost made it 24 hours without hearing another specious complaint about ads. So close . . .



erikg said:


> I probably missed the whole point of this... oh well.


No, there never was a point to this. Nothing to see. Move along, move along . . .


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

RobertJ said:


> (There is an interesting question about whether such use would be patent infringement, but that is incredibly complicated and depends on the particular patents.)


Could you please give me the cases that even suggest that this could be patent infringement? I'm unfamiliar with them.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

CrispyCritter said:


> Could you please give me the cases that even suggest that this could be patent infringement? I'm unfamiliar with them.


Selling something you own that has a patent you don't have rights to, no infringement. Making something using someones patent (you don't have the right to) and not selling it...no infringement, if you make and sell using someones patent, that is infringement. Using a cable signal that you are not paying for, or the TiVo guide data you are not paying for, is theft of something. I wonder how the Sling Box get around this if I give my friend the right to watch HBO I am paying for but in his home he is not paying for...? I play a stolen DVD in my home is that theft of anything, the act of stealing the DVD is theft, but the use thereafter..? Some legal questions have no answers until the issue (if ever) go through the court system, that what case law is all about.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

RobertJ said:


> You're absolutely right. Note that this document specifically defines "Tivo Service" as meaning certain functions within the Tivo (season pass, wish list, etc.) under Section 3. It does not say that "you cannot use the Tivo under any circumstances unless you subscribe."


 gee, if only someone had posted that section.  Section 3 lists the gudied data from Tivo and basically all the functions except the live TV buffer and trick play.



> A consumer also don't necessarily even need to accept these terms and conditions at all. Someone could potentially just buy a Tivo box and use it as they see fit, without accepting the terms of the license agreement. (I.e., without "phoning home" to Tivo or using Tivo services in any way.) Or they could terminate the license agreement, as in Paragraph 15. It's not copyright infringement or "theft" of any sort just to use preinstalled software that comes with hardware I purchase.


 well that statemnet is just wrong. *again, no one pruchases the software nor the rights to sell the software.* You can not sell what you do not own. What comes on the box is software that has a "terms of Service" for its use. the second consumer or the 100th consumer has to follow the terms of service just like anyone else. That is it.. bottom line folks.. no legal way around it. This kind of leased software agreement has been around a long time and is used by major software companies in many forms, even down to what hardware the software can run on(as is the case with TiVo). It is not going away and TiVo has no legal issues to worry about on Terms of Service. TiVo has even sucessfully and legally shutdown web sites that did explain how to steal service. The full backing of the courts and case law is very evident on this theft of service.

PS - it is not patent infringement in nay shape or form. I merely pointed out it was patented software since we had heard early on from an open source counter view.


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

lessd said:


> Selling something you own that has a patent you don't have rights to, no infringement. Making something using someones patent (you don't have the right to) and not selling it...no infringement, if you make and sell using someones patent, that is infringement. Using a cable signal that you are not paying for, or the TiVo guide data you are not paying for, is theft of something. I wonder how the Sling Box get around this if I give my friend the right to watch HBO I am paying for but in his home he is not paying for...? I play a stolen DVD in my home is that theft of anything, the act of stealing the DVD is theft, but the use thereafter..? Some legal questions have no answers until the issue (if ever) go through the court system, that what case law is all about.


I don't argue with anything you say here. I'm pointing out that RobertJ, who says "I happen to be an intellectual property attorney with many years of litigation experience", is now claiming that _use_ of preinstalled software may constitute patent infringement. My mind boggles at the thought, but I'm giving him a chance to make his case.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Atomike said:


> In your response, you are assuming your conclusion (i.e. that recording shows without using Tivo's guide data is stealing).


I never said _not_ using TiVos guide is stealing. I even said is perfectly okay to feed your own guide data to it.

What I have said, is certain recording features are part of the paid service, and enabling them as a means to get around purchasing the TiVo service, is theft of that service.



> This is the crux of the debate. You can't just assume that. Then you try to say he can't even debate that here. Hello -this is not your forum. He's perfectly welcome here.


The confusion stems from the fact some people think the TiVo service is just the guide data, no more. The fact is the TiVo service includes the right to use a number of recording features, at least on the last Series 1s and Series 2/3 units.



> This topic is certainly open for debate. To say he must go somewhere else even to discuss it, is wildly opposed to the purpose of forums.


I am saying the debate is closed here. The fact is those features are now part of the paid TiVo service and enabling them is considered theft of services, and this board has a no service theft policy. Period.

If you want to change that have TiVo change what the TiVo does without service, or discuss the details on a boar that does welcome theft of services. Or even convince the board's current owners to change their policy.



> Personally, I think I come down closest to ZeoTivo's opinion. The hardware is yours to use however you wish without limit, but the software may be a little different. But I welcome all opinions, and think they should be able to speak here.


You can take your "what you can do with the hardware" discussion elsewhere also, as this board is for community support of the hardware, in more or less its stock condition with more or less stock TiVo software, more or less subscribed to the TiVo service.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

CrispyCritter said:


> I don't argue with anything you say here. I'm pointing out that RobertJ, who says "I happen to be an intellectual property attorney with many years of litigation experience", is now claiming that _use_ of preinstalled software may constitute patent infringement. My mind boggles at the thought, but I'm giving him a chance to make his case.


I did not pick that up..I purchase a computer with pre-installed software, most consumer items have pre-installed software, kids toys have pre-installed software; could there be any limit of the use of that software on the item it came with. If you remove the software and used it on some other equipment..that may be a different story. I do not think TiVo can legally stop one from using the software that in a box that is purchased even without a sub, but TiVo makes that hard to do without a sub. This is all academic as the effort it would take to avoid a TiVo sub and still use the TiVo as intended for any individual is more effort then the cost of the sub, and selling a hacked TiVo would be illegal or providing the information to to so may be illegal (at least on this form it is)


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

classicsat said:


> You can take your "what you can do with the hardware" discussion elsewhere also, as this board is for community support of the hardware, in more or less its stock condition with more or less stock TiVo software, more or less subscribed to the TiVo service.


Why? A lot of legacy TiVo boxes are ending up in the unsubbed pile and there really is no good reason to sub them anymore either. It would seem a part of the community if someone came up wit ha way to install LINUX on them, come up with open spurce drivers or drivers of their own and start playing around with things to do with the hardware. Maybe make it a dedicated server of music, pictures and home video files and get a Linux version of Galleon running on it to interface with the shiny new subbed Tivo DVRs in the house. Just make it a new forum in the undergorund area. Granted that desire for such may be limited since it would be much easier to do the same on a headless 2 or 3 hundred dollar PC but it sounds like a legitimate hobby to me and if I found FAQ somewhere on how to do it I would give it a shot in a heartbeat.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

lessd said:


> I did not pick that up..I purchase a computer with pre-installed software, most consumer items have pre-installed software, kids toys have pre-installed software; could there be any limit of the use of that software on the item it came with.


come on guys - software comes with a license. The license says that use of the software means acceptance of the license and its terms. The terms might be to use indefinitely without any further consideration to the copyright holder of the software - or it might say - you can use it free for 30 days and then have to pay to use it after that.

The gateway laptop I just bought my daughter has games on it, like Polar bowler. You can play the games a few times and then they stop. you have to pay to play the game after that. All very legal and the games do indeed stop. *there are limits on the use of that software, bottom line*

TiVo has quite clearly dileneated how it can legally stop the DVR software from working. Anyone who gets the software working after that is doing so illegally. Anyone who shows someone how to get the software working illegally can also be taken to court and made to stop showing how. Think what you want but the actual lawyers and judges know differently.


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

CrispyCritter said:


> I don't argue with anything you say here. I'm pointing out that RobertJ, who says "I happen to be an intellectual property attorney with many years of litigation experience", is now claiming that _use_ of preinstalled software may constitute patent infringement. My mind boggles at the thought, but I'm giving him a chance to make his case.


CrispyCritter:

Your mind is easily boggled. Basic patent law says that it an act of patent infringement for someone to "make, use, sell, offer to sell, or import" a product that infringes a patent. 35 USC Section 271(a). This is straight out of the United States Patent Act. This is patent law 101.

Tivo has lots of patents. I haven't read them. However, it's likely that the patents claim various aspects of the Tivo hardware and software. (The software alone isn't patentable, but the patents usually claim hardware that operates in conjunction with particular software.)

If you want a specific example, Tivo won a major patent infringement suit against EchoStar for the so-called "time warp" patent. This means that the EchoStar DVRs were found to be infringing products. Another example is the NTP v. Research in Motion case, where the plaintiff won a major patent infringement case because handheld Blackberry devices were found to infringe several patents.

If someone uses an infringing product without permission from the patent owner, that is patent infringement. Under the Echostar example, the company was infringing the patent because it was "selling" infringing DVRs. However, the consumers are also nominally infringing the patents by "using" the same infringing DVRs under Section 271(a).

In theory, a person who was using a hacked Tivo box could also be infringing those patents. In practice, companies never go after individuals because patent infringement cases can often cost six or seven figures to litigate. They aren't going to sue an individual to get $50 in damages. It just doesn't happen.

Also, a person who lawfully purchased a Tivo and used it (even without a license agreement) would also have a defense to patent infringement under the "first sale" doctrine. This is the principle that if you buy a patented product from the patent owner, you're entitled to use it for its intended purpose. However, Tivo could argue that hacking the product went beyond what was permissible.

That's why I said this was an "interesting question." It's a theoretical issue, but not likely to play out in practice.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

RobertJ said:


> In theory, a person who was using a hacked Tivo box could also be infringing those patents. In practice, companies never go after individuals because patent infringement cases can often cost six or seven figures to litigate. They aren't going to sue an individual to get $50 in damages. It just doesn't happen.


umm, so you are saying a TiVo branded DVR made by TiVo inc. would be infringing the TiVo patent. Sounds far more like a simple case of Theft of TiVo service by using the TiVo software outside the terms of service.

So what is the specific charge for someone using software in an unlicensed manner?


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> come on guys - software comes with a license. The license says that use of the software means acceptance of the license and its terms.....


You seem to be making two assumptions: (1) that the terms are automatically binding on anyone who purchases a Tivo, and (2) that you need to have a license to use the Tivo under any circumstance.

For the first point, a license is a contract. To be a binding contract, it has to be accepted by both sides. You don't necessarily agree to the terms of a EULA-type license simply by buying hardware that comes with software.

For the second point, there's no reason that an end user necessarily needs a license from Tivo just to use the hardware (with preinstalled software). You only need a license if your use of the product is otherwise an act of infringement (copyright infringement or patent infringement). Simply using a Tivo box, without making copies of the software, isn't copyright infringement or otherwise "illegal." Consequently, you wouldn't necessarily need a license if, hypothetically, you were to get program guide data from someone other than Tivo.


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm, so you are saying a TiVo branded DVR made by TiVo inc. would be infringing the TiVo patent. Sounds far more like a simple case of Theft of TiVo service by using the TiVo software outside the terms of service.
> 
> So what is the specific charge for someone using software in an unlicensed manner?


The point about patent infringement may sound silly, but there are lots of cases where making changes to a patented product in an unauthorized manner and then continuing to use it is considered patent infringement. It's complicated. Here's a quick summary of two cases. Again, this is pretty theoretical here.

http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/1997/1297Bulletin/US_RepairReconst.html

However, there is no general law against "theft of services" for using software in "an unlicensed manner." The general rule is that if you've paid for the software (or hardware with software), you're free to use it as you see fit. The exceptions are if that use would be (1) copyright infringement, (2) patent infringement, and/or (3) breach of contract. You have to be more specific.

It could be a breach of an end-user license agreement (like the agreement here), but that assumes that the EULA is binding in the first place. The jury is still out on the enforceability of these types of agreements.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

RobertJ said:


> The point about patent infringement may sound silly, but there are lots of cases where making changes to a patented product in an unauthorized manner and then continuing to use it is considered patent infringement. It's complicated. Here's a quick summary of two cases. Again, this is pretty theoretical here.
> 
> http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/1997/1297Bulletin/US_RepairReconst.html
> 
> ...


Some EULA are fairly vague and arbitrary ( the old use it like a book EULA comes to mind*) so the jury is still out on them in general.

The TiVo EULA is very specific on its terms of service and what constitutes the Service. I do not think a judge or jury would have a hard time with that one. You are clearly stealing the service even if you do not have the DVR call into TiVo since you are using season passes and the patented Time warp technology that are on the DVR box. So thanks for the clarification I was seeking on what the true charges would be. Either infringement or breach of contract depending on which the TiVo lawyer thought presented the stronger case. Most likely infringement given the recent wins in court and at the patent office for TiVo.

Still it is just easier on this board to use the more descriptive theft of service as that is what it actually is.

*install on many PCs as long as you can promise only one copy is in use at any given time. Was used to sell software to companies that employee's could also use at home after work hours mainly.


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

Last post on the subject. There's lots of good information about these types of issues on the website for the Electronic Freedom Foundation. Here's one:

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/11/you-bought-it-you-own-it-part-iv-quanta-v-lg-electronics

In this case (which is still being litigated), Lexmark tried to ban users from refilling ink cartridges for inkjet printers by attaching a sticker that said "single use only." Lexmark says this sticker is a binding contract that prevents you from refilling the cartridge. EFF is attacking this on the principle of "you bought it, you own it."

That's basically what we're discussing here. Lexmark sells its printers under the principle of "give away the razor and sell the blades." They sell the printers at a loss, and make the profits through the ink cartridges. Lexmark doesn't want you to buy ink from someone else, and they're trying to make people "agree" not to do so through a sticker. However, I doubt that anyone here would realistically call it "theft of services" (or "theft of hardware") for someone to refill a Lexmark printer cartridge with non-Lexmark ink.

Tivo is operating under the same business model. Sell the boxes for cheap (the razors), and make its profit through monthly fees (the blades). It doesn't want you to get program guide information from elsewhere because that would undercut its revenue. It's trying to prevent you from doing so through a license agreement. Just because we're dealing with hardware and software, instead of ink cartridges, doesn't fundamentally change this equation.

I'm pretty conservative when it comes to intellectual property protection, and don't always agree with the EFF. However, this "you buy it, you own it" principle is something I agree with as a consumer. If I buy hardware or software legally, I'm entitled to use it for a fair use.


----------



## RobertJ (Jun 1, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> You are clearly stealing the service even if you do not have the DVR call into TiVo since you are using season passes and the patented Time warp technology that are on the DVR box. ...


That's where we disagree. I don't believe you're "stealing" anything if you're just using software for which you've already paid. If you are somehow getting your program guide information from another source -- without dialing into Tivo -- how is that "theft" of anything?

As a matter of principle, I consider that to be a fair use. As a legal matter, it's lawful unless it's a violation of copyright, patent or contract law. (All of this is complicated, but pretty doubtful.)


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

RobertJ said:


> CrispyCritter:
> 
> Your mind is easily boggled. Basic patent law says that it an act of patent infringement for someone to "make, use, sell, offer to sell, or import" a product that infringes a patent. 35 USC Section 271(a). This is straight out of the United States Patent Act. This is patent law 101.


And it implies to me that you don't have a case and are just trying to confuse the issue. Personal modifications for personal use is not patent infringement, and your quote does not imply it is patent infringement.

Your definition and examples only apply if there is a third party offering a modification of the product. They are the ones possibly creating a new product that infringes on the original product. A subsequent use of that product may indeed be an infringing use. Nobody here has talked about such a third party (and that party would have much more to worry about than just patent infringement).

(You might want to re-read the cases you pointed out. A major issue in the drill retipping case was whether a customer would do it themselves. If they could easily do it themselves, then it would not be patent infringement for the defendant to offer it as a service).


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

RobertJ said:


> Tivo is operating under the same business model. Sell the boxes for cheap (the razors), and make its profit through monthly fees (the blades). It doesn't want you to get program guide information from elsewhere because that would undercut its revenue. It's trying to prevent you from doing so through a license agreement. Just because we're dealing with hardware and software, instead of ink cartridges, doesn't fundamentally change this equation.


TiVo software is hardly an ink cartridge. I agree as well that trying to put a sticker on an ink cartridge saying you can not refill it is not a legitimate use of an EULA - that is the company clearly trying to bilk money from the customers for a very simple service, goes to the heart of the drill bit example you posted .

So the point above is really only that companies can not use whatever EULA the feel like doing. TiVo could change the EULA to say you can only watch shows once, no matter what the copyright holder or broadcaster said. No court would uphold that either as it is not part of any legitimate business model

but the terms of service TiVo has put forward are part of a clear and legitimate business model that is also used by many other software companies. The software is patented and copyrighted and for the millionth time - *TiVo clearly does not sell the software nor rights to the software along with the box* How would your argument hold up if instead TiVo had just the software needed to copy the actual software on the TiVo if you chose to contact the company and acquire the software to start using the TiVo. Right! it would fall apart. No software present at your nebulous purchase point so no way it was purchased then.
Reasonable people however recognize it is easier for the software to be preloaded., for both the company and the customer. So as long as TiVo is clear about the terms of Service and clearly advises customers that a service subscription is needed to use the software at point of sale then TiVo has no legal issues to worry about. 
What would happen if the idea of software on the box at purchase is yours came to pass. Then a TiVo HD would cost 1,000 at point of sale or else TiVo would go out of business, How could either ending be considered a win for anyone. So please stop giving the EFF a bad name with such a pointless case.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

CrispyCritter said:


> And it implies to me that you don't have a case and are just trying to confuse the issue. .


actually he finally showed his true colors with the EFF thing. I think now he just wants to FUD things up.

his post #60 is just repeating himself without acknowledging any of the rebuttal, as if we need to rebut it again for some reason


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

Let make this simple: If a 3rd party sold a "thing" that could attach to a TiVo and cause the TiVo to call to that 3rd parties sight for guide data, time data etc that 3rd party would have a BIG problem with TiVo (remember Studio 123 for DVD movie coping..put out of business), I don't know how big a problem it would be for the TiVo owners (in the 123 case they never went after the customers of 123). If you personally developed the "thing " and used it on only your TiVo (never sold or told anybody about it) I don't think you would have any problem because you do own the hardware and the software you purchased for your use, no statements that TiVo makes can be binding on someone that naver even read them, and how could TiVo prove you read them.


----------



## dasadler (Dec 13, 2007)

I am not sure how this fits with respect to the legal arguments that this thread has developed but as far as alternative programming I found a website at www.zap2it.com that has TV Listng information and allows you to link your zap2it account (which is free) to your TIVO account. I do not yet have a TIVO (I expect one for Christmas) so I cannot comment on what the linking provides or any limitations.

If anyone else looks at zap2it, could you please post publicly what it offers TIVOwise? Or send me a private message.

BTW, the first comment was intended to be "tongue-in-cheek" as I had no interest in, or intention of, contributing to the legal discussion. I was just commenting on how the subject of this thread got derailed.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

dasadler said:


> I am not sure how this fits with respect to the legal arguments that this thread has developed but as far as alternative programming I found a website at www.zap2it.com that has TV Listng information and allows you to link your zap2it account (which is free) to your TIVO account. I do not yet have a TIVO (I expect one for Christmas) so I cannot comment on what the linking provides or any limitations.
> 
> If anyone else looks at zap2it, could you please post publicly what it offers TIVOwise? Or send me a private message.


I think that for on-line automatic scheduling of your TiVo..nothing wrong with that because you need a TiVo sub for your TiVo to get on-line information or even show up in your TiVo account.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

dasadler said:


> I am not sure how this fits with respect to the legal arguments that this thread has developed but as far as alternative programming I found a website at www.zap2it.com that has TV Listng information and allows you to link your zap2it account (which is free) to your TIVO account. I do not yet have a TIVO (I expect one for Christmas) so I cannot comment on what the linking provides or any limitations.
> 
> If anyone else looks at zap2it, could you please post publicly what it offers TIVOwise? Or send me a private message.
> 
> BTW, the first comment was intended to be "tongue-in-cheek" as I had no interest in, or intention of, contributing to the legal discussion. I was just commenting on how the subject of this thread got derailed.


Zap2It is owned by Tribune which is who provides TiVo with their guide data. The guide data on zap2it.com is the exact same as you will see on your TiVo. TiVo has deals with Tribune and Yahoo to provide online scheduling to Series 2 and Series 3 boxes.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

lessd said:


> If you personally developed the "thing " and used it on only your TiVo (never sold or told anybody about it) I don't think you would have any problem because you do own the hardware and the software you purchased for your use, no statements that TiVo makes can be binding on someone that naver even read them, and how could TiVo prove you read them.


if you use the TiVo software features defined as the TiVo service (read software on the TiVo) without setting up a valid subscription then you have a problem if TiVo decided to take action. Just because you keep ignoring the fact that no one can purchase the software or the rights to the software does not mean that fact is not in play. 
Also as long as TiVo makes reasonable efforts to publicly provide the terms of service and the fact anyone needs a subscription then ignorance of that information does not magically mean it does not apply to someone.

Most lawyers send a cease and desist letter first anyway to give reasonable people a chance to comply without any legal wrangling.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

dasadler said:


> I am not sure how this fits with respect to the legal arguments that this thread has developed but as far as alternative programming I found a website at www.zap2it.com that has TV Listng information and allows you to link your zap2it account (which is free) to your TIVO account. I do not yet have a TIVO (I expect one for Christmas) so I cannot comment on what the linking provides or any limitations.
> 
> If anyone else looks at zap2it, could you please post publicly what it offers TIVOwise? Or send me a private message.
> 
> BTW, the first comment was intended to be "tongue-in-cheek" as I had no interest in, or intention of, contributing to the legal discussion. I was just commenting on how the subject of this thread got derailed.


Really, feeding guide data itself is not wrong, as long as the TiVo is proper authorized by TiVo subscription. Feeding it Z2I data is redundant (disregarding Z2I is unavailable for free anymore), since that is what TiVo offers anyway, unless you need a custom lineup, which you shouldn't need anyway, if you are getting your TV on the up-and-up.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

classicsat said:


> unless you need a custom lineup, which you shouldn't need anyway, if you are getting your TV on the up-and-up.


Hello? Open QAM? Among other things that Tivo/Tribune refuse to deal with... Not to mention, have you ever tried to get them to make a lineup change? It would almost be easier to provide my own guide data. Almost.


----------

