# E* ordered to disconnect it's DVR's



## moonman (Jul 21, 2004)

A judge has ordered EchoStar Communications to disable the digital video recorders used by several million subscribers to its Dish Network satellite TV service because they infringe on patents held by TiVo. 

Thursday's ruling from U.S. District Judge David Folsom in Marshall, Texas, demands that within 30 days, EchoStar must basically render useless all but 192,708 of the DVR units it has deployed.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

Also reported here.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=312139


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

"all but 192,708 of the DVR units" Which doesn't it have to the DVR features off on? I'd like to think a lot of people would defect to Directv, but they'll only get an R15-be MUCH better if the got DirecTivos.
R15 or not, Directv ought to jump on this. "Directv will replace ALL your Dish Network receivers for free, along with the dish and installation."


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

Injunction blocked by 5th Circuit.


----------



## moonman (Jul 21, 2004)

Jon J said:


> Injunction blocked by 5th Circuit.


----------------------
The excitement is over:

EchoStar Announces Federal Circuit Blocks Tivo Injunction 
ENGLEWOOD, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 18, 2006--EchoStar Communications Corporation (NASDAQ: DISH) issued the following statement regarding recent developments in the Tivo 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 issued by 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."


----------



## DDayDawg (Jul 13, 2004)

So, they didn't steal TiVo's patent, but they are going to fix the part they stole so it isn't a legal issue any more just the same? If that isn't some circular logic I don't know what is...


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

What EXACTLY is the infringement?


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

Oversimplification follows.... 

Essentially, the primary part of the TiVo patent covers the way that data moves from the MPEG encoder -> hard drive -> MPEG decoder, all with minimal CPU intervention (aka DMA). This is a very cool way to do this, and the results are that you can build a TiVo with very inexpensive hardware, since the CPU isn't actually handling the data, merely controlling the flow.

It's not so much that this enables things like Trick Play and record-while-watching, its that is allows you to build it cheap enough for a consumer set-top box. 

Jeff

(PS - part of the debate in the trial was the fact that a Sat receiver doesn't have an MPEG encoder, therefore the patent didn't apply. I believe the court ruled correctly, since the "encoder" isn't important, its the 'receive stream', which is how TiVo probably should have worded the patent. But even without that argument, there *IS* and MPEG encoder involved. It just happens to be a very big one back at Echostar's uplink center  )


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

What Jim said ... also reported here.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=312139


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

jautor said:


> Oversimplification follows....
> 
> Essentially, the primary part of the TiVo patent covers the way that data moves from the MPEG encoder -> hard drive -> MPEG decoder, all with minimal CPU intervention (aka DMA). This is a very cool way to do this, and the results are that you can build a TiVo with very inexpensive hardware, since the CPU isn't actually handling the data, merely controlling the flow.
> 
> It's not so much that this enables things like Trick Play and record-while-watching, its that is allows you to build it cheap enough for a consumer set-top box...


I may just be naive, but I was always under the impression that all PVRs handled encoding and decoding in hardware (i.e., dedicated chips) and not by using the main microporocessor that also handles the OS. Maybe it's the precise way Tivo does this that is in question.

I don't think Tivo really ever expects DISH to have to decommission PVR features, but they certainly are reveling in twisting the knife by pushing the issue as far as they can, hoping probably for a royalty settlement.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

TyroneShoes said:


> I may just be naive, but I was always under the impression that all PVRs handled encoding and decoding in hardware (i.e., dedicated chips) and not by using the main microporocessor that also handles the OS. Maybe it's the precise way Tivo does this that is in question.


Correct, but I wasn't talking about the encoding, but rather the movement of data to and from the encoder/decoder/hard disk. Yes, all DVR's probably have all of their video encode/decode done with hardware.

The difference is how you feed those pipes... Your PC would set up the MPEG encoder hardware to dump the resulting data into main memory, perhaps manipulate the data, then write the data to the hard disk. In the TiVo (with the Media Switch), the data goes directly from the encoder to the hard disk. Playback is done the same way - hard drive directly to decoder.

That's the cool part... 

Jeff
(again, probably a gross oversimplification, but that's how Barton explained it at some lectures way back in the early TiVo days)


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

jautor said:


> Correct, but I wasn't talking about the encoding, but rather the movement of data to and from the encoder/decoder/hard disk. Yes, all DVR's probably have all of their video encode/decode done with hardware.
> 
> The difference is how you feed those pipes... Your PC would set up the MPEG encoder hardware to dump the resulting data into main memory, perhaps manipulate the data, then write the data to the hard disk. In the TiVo (with the Media Switch), the data goes directly from the encoder to the hard disk. Playback is done the same way - hard drive directly to decoder.
> 
> ...


I think we're saying somewhat the same thing. Maybe not.

But, I don't see any advantage to taking low-throughput tasks off the microprocessor. Encoding, decoding, sure.

So I guess what it comes down to is certain DISH PVRs violate rights held by Tivo by doing things precisely or too similarly to the way Tivo does, and all other non-Tivo DVRs are in the clear, legally speaking.

It seems a bit ironic that DISH would copy under-the-hood routines that would get them into hot water, while they have no concept of how to copy the interface features, expandability, and stability that sets Tivo so far above them.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

TyroneShoes said:


> But, I don't see any advantage to taking low-throughput tasks off the microprocessor.


If I remember from reading some of the testimony, using this Barton method allowed for a far less powerful CPU required and significantly lowered the cost of the box.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

jfh3 said:


> If I remember from reading some of the testimony, using this Barton method allowed for a far less powerful CPU required and significantly lowered the cost of the box.


Yep. That's the jist... Moving two simultaneous streams of several megabits/second is not something that was done easily at the time. You'd certainly have a significantly more expensive processor complex (CPU + memory) without the Barton switch. Note that it's not just a CPU horsepower thing - transferring directly between the components means you don't have to have megabytes of memory laying around to buffer everything...

Now, 7 years later, the price difference between an implementation with or without it may be negligible. Well, for an SD DVR... I think you'd still want to use this technique for an HD DVR to keep costs down.

Jeff


----------



## Gotchaa (Feb 9, 2003)

jautor said:


> Now, 7 years later, the price difference between an implementation with or without it may be negligible. Well, for an SD DVR... I think you'd still want to use this technique for an HD DVR to keep costs down.
> 
> Jeff


Or extremely slow


----------



## Rob Dawn (Aug 16, 2002)

So the next question then is:

Does the new DirecTV HR20 violate this same TiVo patent?


----------



## AstroDad (Jan 21, 2003)

Rob Dawn said:


> So the next question then is:
> 
> Does the new DirecTV HR20 violate this same TiVo patent?


TiVo and DirecTV signed an aggreement which, in part, made sure TiVo would not come after DirecTV


----------



## moonman (Jul 21, 2004)

No. EchoStar lost a patent case filed by DVR company TiVo which could force them to stop offering their current DVR service. (The case is on appeal.) But DIRECTV has signed an agreement with TiVo saying each company will not sue the other over patents.


----------



## Rob Dawn (Aug 16, 2002)

moonman said:


> No. EchoStar lost a patent case filed by DVR company TiVo which could force them to stop offering their current DVR service. (The case is on appeal.) But DIRECTV has signed an agreement with TiVo saying each company will not sue the other over patents.


That's very good to hear, knowing that we will have to switch to the new HR20 eventually as they start adding new MPEG4 HD channels.

Now what happens when the current DirecTV/TiVo agreement ends in the not-too-distant future? Can TiVo sue DirecTV over the non-TiVo DVRs that DirecTV is moving rowards?


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

Rob Dawn said:


> That's very good to hear, knowing that we will have to switch to the new HR20 eventually as they start adding new MPEG4 HD channels.
> 
> Now what happens when the current DirecTV/TiVo agreement ends in the not-too-distant future? Can TiVo sue DirecTV over the non-TiVo DVRs that DirecTV is moving rowards?


If those non-TiVo DVRs infringe on any of TiVo's patents, sure... But NDS / DirecTV may have patents that TiVo violates... (I don't know that to be the case, but I'd bet NDS has a decent portfolio) So one would expect a countersuit, too.

But I think we'll see a patent cross-license agreement between DirecTV / NDS and TiVo about the time that the current "cross-license plus support" agreement runs out (in 2010?).


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

Dish could disable the dvr capability of the box and customers would then have a non infringing non dvr to use until dish comes up with a workaround. Still a lot of customers could move to DirecTV, which doesn't help Tivo a lot because they won't be getting Tivos from DirecTV either.


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

Tivo could offer free or discounted Tivos for Dish customers (Probably like 1 free and a discount if you want additional Tivos).


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

kturcotte said:


> Tivo could offer free or discounted Tivos for Dish customers (Probably like 1 free and a discount if you want additional Tivos).


I'll bet the HTML / email offer has already been written for that one! 

I'd only expect that to show up if the injunction actually went into effect, which I'd give a very low probability - Dish would settle (probably 24 hours before) that happened...

Jeff


----------



## wje (Jan 8, 2005)

Unfortuately, the only satellite-capable Tivo HD DVR is the HR10-250. Neither D* nor E* have Tivo in their future (for the moment). As more and more MPEG4 feeds are brought up, the HR10 becomes less and less useful, since it's MPEG2 only.


----------



## slydog75 (Jul 8, 2004)

moonman said:


> ...But DIRECTV has signed an agreement with TiVo saying each company will not sue the other over patents.


What exactly did Tivo get out of this agreement? Seems heavily lopsided in DirecTV's favor.


----------



## morgantown (Mar 29, 2005)

slydog75 said:


> What exactly did Tivo get out of this agreement? Seems heavily lopsided in DirecTV's favor.


I thought the deal was more along the lines of TiVo would not sue for any existing DirecTV DVR's utilized prior to the signing date. That would mean the HR20 is not covered by the agreement but the R15 is.

They (TiVo) also continue to get paid and not face a situation where DTV could make the unlikely decision to replace all the SD DirecTiVo's with R15's and bid farewell to TiVo ...and alienate a whole bunch of DirecTiVo users.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

wje said:


> Unfortuately, the only satellite-capable Tivo HD DVR is the HR10-250. Neither D* nor E* have Tivo in their future (for the moment). As more and more MPEG4 feeds are brought up, the HR10 becomes less and less useful, since it's MPEG2 only.


Other then the LONG since announced Comcast TiVo...
There are no other integrated units in the near semi-long future.

The SA-DT is the only new product they have had since the HR10-250...

So if the Tivo Series 3 isn't a massive hit.... (which pretty much is going to tick off all the cable-co's as they don't want cable-cards)...........


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

wje said:


> Unfortuately, the only satellite-capable Tivo HD DVR is the HR10-250. Neither D* nor E* have Tivo in their future (for the moment). As more and more MPEG4 feeds are brought up, the HR10 becomes less and less useful, since it's MPEG2 only.


Actually, the usefulness of the HR10 will not decrease at all as MPEG4 feeds are brought up, because this will have no affect on MPEG2 channels, which the HR10 will still be just as useful as ever in recording. And since the usefulness of the HR10 for MPEG4 has always been and will always be zero, it still really doesn't matter how many new MPEG4 channels are brought up, as the (complete and utter lack of) usefulness for an HR10 to record those will remain the same as well.

What would make the HR10 less useful would be when the MPEG2 channels begin to disappear.

IOW, MPEG4 has nothing to do with how useful the HR10 is or will be. MPEG2 channels going away is what will have everything to do with that, but of course that will be a while, and probably never for OTA. So the clock on any potential decline in HR10 usefulness doesn't start at the beginning of MPEG4, it starts at the beginning of the end for MPEG2. Those two events are quite separated on the timeline. Of course whatever channels a particular viewer wants that might be MPEG4 will change that personal timeline for that viewer.

But wouldn't it be ironic if DISH responds to the crisis by eventually making a deal with Tivo?


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

TyroneShoes said:


> But wouldn't it be ironic if DISH responds to the crisis by eventually making a deal with Tivo?


I would have it on Day 1, and I would LOVE to call Directv and tell them I was leaving because Dish had a receiver with built in Tivo!!!
An MPEG-4 HD DishTivo? Dare I dream?!


----------



## MarcusInMD (Jan 7, 2005)

TyroneShoes said:


> Actually, the usefulness of the HR10 will not decrease at all as MPEG4 feeds are brought up, because this will have no affect on MPEG2 channels, which the HR10 will still be just as useful as ever in recording. And since the usefulness of the HR10 for MPEG4 has always been and will always be zero, it still really doesn't matter how many new MPEG4 channels are brought up, as the (complete and utter lack of) usefulness for an HR10 to record those will remain the same as well.
> 
> What would make the HR10 less useful would be when the MPEG2 channels begin to disappear.
> 
> ...


Perhaps not, but when the new MPEG4 nationals start to show up and you can't receive them with the HR10 it will become less and less desireable to use. It will be mighty hard for some to resist the urge to make the switch once they know that there is more HDTV available to them on the same platform. But it appears to me that many here seem more interested in keeping the Tivo interface then they are with enjoying more HDTV variety.


----------



## slydog75 (Jul 8, 2004)

kturcotte said:


> I would have it on Day 1, and I would LOVE to call Directv and tell them I was leaving because Dish had a receiver with built in Tivo!!!
> An MPEG-4 HD DishTivo? Dare I dream?!


Yep, I'd jump ship in a minute and rub it in D*'s face.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

TyroneShoes said:


> Actually, the usefulness of the HR10 will not decrease at all as MPEG4 feeds are brought up, because this will have no affect on MPEG2 channels, which the HR10 will still be just as useful as ever in recording. And since the usefulness of the HR10 for MPEG4 has always been and will always be zero, it still really doesn't matter how many new MPEG4 channels are brought up, as the (complete and utter lack of) usefulness for an HR10 to record those will remain the same as well.
> 
> What would make the HR10 less useful would be when the MPEG2 channels begin to disappear.
> 
> ...


Last year almost every Yankee game in HD was in MPEG2. every night of the week if there was a homestand. This year although there are significantly more HD games availible as the YES network picked up many of the away games in HF too. Yet only once or twice a week can you get the Yankee games in HD MPEG2. The MPEG4 version is up fulltime. I'd call that less usefull....

I'm wondering now that the HR20 is availible well the sporadic RSN HD games in MPEG2 go bye bye as the MPEG4 RSN's come on line....

I guess they still need them for national HD for the sprts packages like extra innings and all....

I have to figure that putting the HD rsn's national is one of the first things they do with their 150 national HD channel capacity on the 2 new Ka birds next year.

So slowly but surely the mpeg2 things are being supplanted by mpeg4. IT might be a snails pace for directv as a whole but if you are a Yankee fan in NY- there's a significant hit in the usefullness of the HR10 as compared to one year ago or the current HR20.


----------



## slydog75 (Jul 8, 2004)

MarcusInMD said:


> Perhaps not, but when the new MPEG4 nationals start to show up and you can't receive them with the HR10 it will become less and less desireable to use. .


Many people are allready recieving their HD locals via OTA and most likely couldn't care less about getting them D*, including me.


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

The more that's exclusively MPEG-4, the faster they can get that Tivo away from you.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

MichaelK said:


> Last year almost every Yankee game in HD was in MPEG2. every night of the week if there was a homestand. This year although there are significantly more HD games availible as the YES network picked up many of the away games in HF too. Yet only once or twice a week can you get the Yankee games in HD MPEG2. The MPEG4 version is up fulltime. I'd call that less usefull....
> 
> I'm wondering now that the HR20 is availible well the sporadic RSN HD games in MPEG2 go bye bye as the MPEG4 RSN's come on line....
> 
> ...


The real solution is to seek counseling to cure oneself of being a Yankee fan.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dswallow said:


> The real solution is to seek counseling to cure oneself of being a Yankee fan.


or go to cable...


guess what my solution is?


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

slydog75 said:


> Many people are allready recieving their HD locals via OTA and most likely couldn't care less about getting them D*, including me.


Exactly.

Why watch compressed crap from DirecTV when you can watch it full bandwith from the source?
Same goes for Dish, compressed crap.

Only reason I switched from Dish to DirecTV was TiVo, only reason I'm staying with DirecTV is TiVo,
as long as the TiVo's in my sig continue to work with DirecTV and OTA HD, I'll stick around.

phox


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

slydog75 said:


> Many people are allready recieving their HD locals via OTA and most likely couldn't care less about getting them D*, including me.


that's true- especially since D* only seems to give out the big 4. And since many with the HR10 got it understanding that they would need an antenna to get all their locals.

But there are also many people that cant get even those 4 locals OTA - leaves some bad choices. Take Chicago for example- I think their CBS ATSC got stuck on channel 3 which is basically worthless for ATSC. So a lot of people there have a choice of getting CBS in MPEG4 on an HR20 and not getting any PBS or independant stations or keeping MPEG2 HR10 and not getting CBS.


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

I'm paying Directv $150 a month right now. Time Warner just took over in my area, and they offer the equivalent of Total choice Premier, unlimited phone, and high speed internet for $160 a month. HD DVR rental is extra, but I did manage to talk them into letting me have it free for the first year. I didn't take it, but it's looking QUITE tempting!


----------



## MarcusInMD (Jan 7, 2005)

phox_mulder said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Why watch compressed crap from DirecTV when you can watch it full bandwith from the source?
> Same goes for Dish, compressed crap.
> ...


All locals here are now compressed crap - mostly. Running sub-channels are killing bandwidth here. ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, WB. They all run sub-channels. The days of full bandwidth HD are coming to a close for everyone.


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

MarcusInMD said:


> All locals here are now compressed crap - mostly. Running sub-channels are killing bandwidth here. ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, WB. They all run sub-channels. The days of full bandwidth HD are coming to a close for everyone.


I think we (the O&O'd CBS station) are the only station around here that isn't running a subchannel, yet.
CBS is mandating a must carry subchannel of some sort from CBS News, but we haven't implemented it.

OTA still looks pretty darn good from the other network affilites, even with subchannels,
and from what I've heard not so good in MPEG4 from DirecTV,
and about the same from Dish.

phox


----------



## tbb1226 (Sep 16, 2004)

MichaelK said:


> Last year almost every Yankee game in HD was in MPEG2. every night of the week if there was a homestand. This year although there are significantly more HD games availible as the YES network picked up many of the away games in HF too. Yet only once or twice a week can you get the Yankee games in HD MPEG2.
> 
> ...
> 
> So slowly but surely the mpeg2 things are being supplanted by mpeg4. IT might be a snails pace for directv as a whole but if you are a Yankee fan in NY- there's a significant hit in the usefullness of the HR10 as compared to one year ago or the current HR20.


These statements are patently false. There have been VERY few (if any) YES-HD Yankee games produced this season that DirecTV has not carried on channel 95 in MPEG2 format. The Yankees dominate channel 95 with at least 5 games every week. They're on at this very moment with a ROAD game in Seattle (and it's not even in HD). They will be tomorrow night, too.

Either you aren't usually home during these games, you don't actually have DirecTV HD, or you're not as big a Yankee fan as you claim to be, because you could not be farther from the truth.


----------



## MarcusInMD (Jan 7, 2005)

BTW,
I was not speaking of locals but of NATIONAL HD channels. HR10 owners won't be able to see the new channels as they come online sometime in the next 10 years on DirecTV. That would just drive me bonkers.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

tbb1226 said:


> These statements are patently false. There have been VERY few (if any) YES-HD Yankee games produced this season that DirecTV has not carried on channel 95 in MPEG2 format. The Yankees dominate channel 95 with at least 5 games every week. They're on at this very moment with a ROAD game in Seattle (and it's not even in HD). They will be tomorrow night, too.


Exaggerate much? 5 games a week? Please. 

For the next two weeks, there are exactly two Yankees games on Channel 95: today's and tomorrow's. And they're not in HD either.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

tbb1226 said:


> These statements are patently false. There have been VERY few (if any) YES-HD Yankee games produced this season that DirecTV has not carried on channel 95 in MPEG2 format. The Yankees dominate channel 95 with at least 5 games every week. They're on at this very moment with a ROAD game in Seattle (and it's not even in HD). They will be tomorrow night, too.
> 
> Either you aren't usually home during these games, you don't actually have DirecTV HD, or you're not as big a Yankee fan as you claim to be, because you could not be farther from the truth.


I dont know what you get but I'm in the NY DMA, firmly in the yankees area and the wishlist for "at yankees"/ HD is number one in my season pass manager on my HR10-250. So if it's HD then I get it. thinking back- I should correct myself and say lately it's been much much better. But they have certainly been preempted by other teams /hgames much more than last year- especially at the beginning of the year- read the thread full of people *****ing at AVS. So I stand by my original statement that there is less usebility out of the HR10 this year then last when it comes to yankee games in HD.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

MarcusInMD said:


> BTW,
> I was not speaking of locals but of NATIONAL HD channels. HR10 owners won't be able to see the new channels as they come online sometime in the next 10 years on DirecTV. That would just drive me bonkers.


It's more like a blessing in disguise so we don't have to endure the inevitable shopping channel or food network HD premier.

And so much changes in 4 or 5 years or more that it's just not worth speculating about.


----------



## kturcotte (Dec 9, 2002)

dswallow said:


> It's more like a blessing in disguise so we don't have to endure the inevitable shopping channel or food network HD premier.
> 
> And so much changes in 4 or 5 years or more that it's just not worth speculating about.


I'm waiting for those shopping channels to go HD and claim "Must Carry" garbage. Give it some time, they'll be there, right along with the HD Religious channels (See God in glorious HD).


----------



## TonyM (Apr 26, 2002)

slydog75 said:


> Many people are allready recieving their HD locals via OTA and most likely couldn't care less about getting them D*, including me.


Yep, I'm one of those people too... But that didn't stop me from complaining to Directv about not having a new option for HD DVR with Tivo. It got me 6 months of $20.00 off TC Premier (or whatever they call it now) and free HD Pack for the next 6 months. $20 + $10 * 6 = $180 savings for nothing but a complaint call and a threat to jump to Dish, no contract extension, etc..


----------



## btwyx (Jan 16, 2003)

slydog75 said:


> Many people are allready recieving their HD locals via OTA and most likely couldn't care less about getting them D*, including me.


I care, I get my locals via OTA, but they're not reliable.


----------

