Patent Archives - Page 4 of 9

BREAKING: EchoStar & DISH to (finally) pay TiVo

After knocking around in the judicial system for a few years, it looks like TiVo is finally going to receive some cash now that EchoStar & DISH’s Supreme Court patent infringement appeal will not be tackled by the Supreme Court.

No Resolution In Texas (TiVo v EchoStar)

TiVo v. EchoStar (or would that be DISH Network?) patent litigation carries on… The parties reconvened in Texas yesterday for a contempt hearing held at TiVo’s request. EchoStar DVR functionality has been found to infringe on TiVo’s patents. And instead of shutting down their units as court ordered, DISH applied a software update which they … Read more

MovieBeam Rises From The Dead. Again?

Just when you thought it was safe to salvage your Moviebeam box for spare parts, there’s new hope on the horizon that Moviebeam may once again be coming to a television screen near you. Like a zombie from a bad horror flick, Moviebeam continues to rise from the dead feasting on the rotted brains of media moguls and venture capitalists with each new incarnation.

According to the Daily Bankruptcy Review, Movie Gallery has asked for bankruptcy court approval to sell their VOD service to Dar Capital Limited at a $2.25 million price tag.

Movie Gallery pulled the plug on its-on-demand movie service, called MovieBeam, in December as part of its restructuring under Chapter 11 protection. Dar Capital Limited has agreed to buy MovieBeam, which had about 1,800 subscribers at the time it was shut down. The service required customers to purchase a television set-top box that allowed them to order films for between $1.99 and $4.99. Movie Gallery said in court papers filed Thursday that it began shopping the MovieBeam business soon after shuttering the service and that 14 parties showed an interest in the company. Dar Capital is picking up MovieBeam’s remaining assets, which include certain trademarks and intellectual property associated with the business.

Netflix Says Sorry and Gives 5% Credit

I want to follow up on the all-day Netflix outage reported on Monday. Because my DVD delivery was affected by the outage, Netflix sent me a nice apology e-mail giving me a 5% credit for my inconvenience. It’s a nice gesture that is appreciated. Check out more of Brent’s reflections on tech, gadgets, software and … Read more

Analyst Feels Good About DirecTV & TiVo

Bear Stearns is out with a new report today suggesting DirecTV (DTV) may warm to the idea of renewing ties with TiVo under Liberty Media’s ownership, leaving Murdoch’s NDS venture behind. Or perhaps choosing to upsell a TiVo solution. We believe the new DTV management may be more amenable to renewing a relationship with TiVo. … Read more

DirecTV Buys ReplayTV (Huh?)

I’ve lost track of how many times ReplayTV has switched hands. And today they’ve ended up under DirecTV’s wing for who knows what purpose. Replay had abandoned the hardware DVR market, though they still have subscribers, and they’ve been making a play for the PC software DVR market. A small fish in a small pond.

So far, this is all we know:

Japan’s D&M Holdings Inc said on Thursday it had sold its ReplayTV business, which develops software for digital video recorders, to DirecTV of the United States for an undisclosed sum.

Perhaps DTV will put out a release and clue us in to their intentions. Until then, we’ll just have to speculate… I suppose it’s possible they could (think about) using the ReplayTV interface on their satellite DVRs, re-enter the stand-alone hardware business, or (most likely) just hang onto Replay’s patent portfolio for a rainy day (when/if their do-not-sue deal with TiVo expires in 2010). Or to prevent that rainy day.

IBM Files For DVD Advertisement Patent

While digging through the US patent website, I noticed that IBM has filed an application to place non-skippable DVD commercial advertisements. It’s hard for to believe that there isn’t prior art for this already but, according to the application, commercials can either be updated via the internet or they can be embedded directly on the disc:

A method wherein contents of DVDs may be restricted based upon purchased certificates is provided. The certificates allow for secured information on playback. Specifically, whenever a DVD is to be played, a certificate is consulted to determine whether the content of the DVD should be played with or without commercial interruptions. If the certificates provide for commercial interruptions, then commercials can be obtained from an online service that renders commercials on demand, or from the DVD itself. In such a case, the content of the DVD may be interspersed with commercials.

I’m usually a fan of new DVD technology, but I’ve got mixed feelings about this one. Every now and then, I’ll come across a DVD that won’t let me skip past the previews and it drives me absolutely nuts. If I’ve already paid for my content, then should I be forced to watch advertisements? It makes me feel like the studios are double dipping.

On the other hand, I could see plenty of advantages in ad- upported DVDs. There are lots people who aren’t willing to pay money to watch a DVD. If they can catch up on a series by dealing with the ads, then this technology could introduce time shifting to an entirely new audience. It could also open up new distribution channels to content providers. For example, if McDonalds included ad supported Disney flicks into their Happy Meals, I wager that they’d reach more viewers than Friday nights on ABC.

TiVo v EchoStar: Boredom in the Courtroom

No disrespect to the court, the judges, the attorneys, or anyone else… but, man, was that boring.

Essentially, ~80 of us gathered in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for a little over an hour while EchoStar and TiVo provided oral argument in Echo’s appeal of TiVo’s lower court jury win in this ongoing DVR patent dispute. Echo’s position is that there were “claim construction issues” in regards to how three patent elements (2 hardware, 1 software) were presented. A whole lot of discussion (judges and lawyers from both sides) focused on the meaning and implication of the words separate (how, when, and physical versus logcial), source object/collection (in regards to software components), and an (is it both singular and plural).

The three judges posed some interesting questions during the proceedings: Why is the jury’s decision invalid? If the appeals court invalidates some of the claims but not all, do monetary awards and injunction terms change? (TiVo says no, Echo says yes.)

I have no inkling of what the outcome will be… and I suspect the case will be largely decided on the contents of the humongous documents (blue book from Echo, red book from TiVo) rather than these oral arguments, which seemed more about clarification.

So what happens next? Apparently, verdicts are put onto the web when they’re ready with no advance notice – Sadly, there won’t be any courtroom theatrics of thrown DVRs. (I’d come back for that!) Sounds like if the lower court’s ruling is simply affirmed, we should hear something in the next week or so. Otherwise, it could be a few months while the judges mull things over and render their decision.