Appeals court rules redesigned EchoStar box still infringes on TiVo's DVR

By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published March 4, 2010, 1:04 PM

Tivo.jpgIn a precedent-setting win for the company perceived as the originator of "time-shift" video recording, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has fully affirmed a lower court's judgment that satellite service provider EchoStar's software continued to infringe upon TiVo's patents even after making significant changes to address its complaints. This despite what EchoStar (whose DVR boxes are also used by former sister company Dish Network) had called "Herculean" efforts to steer clear of TiVo's intellectual property, and a preliminary US Patent Office rejection last August casting doubt on the validity of TiVo's patents.

At issue was whether EchoStar modified the software for two of its recorders, called the 50X and Broadcom series (the latter named after the supplier of its key hardware), in such a way that it didn't store video in a stream similar to TiVo's patented methodology. Last June, after a jury found in favor of TiVo on the infringement charge, a US district court slapped an injunction on EchoStar and Dish Network boxes. EchoStar did not appeal that injunction, and it may have thought it wasn't really enforced while courts jostled back and forth over possible penalties. That prompted TiVo to move the district court to find EchoStar in contempt. It did, and today the Appeals Court upheld that finding.

In the appeals panel's 2-1 decision today, they refuted the notion that a trial on the reformed EchoStar software should have been a separate proceeding, on account of the software being completely reformed. TiVo argued that the changes were trivial, and the higher court agreed.

"We also reject EchoStar's and the dissent's [Judge Randall Rader's] argument that the district court was required to limit its analysis to whether the modified devices had eliminated start-code detection and indexing," wrote judge H. R. Mayer and Alan Lourie for the majority (PDF available here). "EchoStar argues that a contempt hearing is proper only when the redesigned devices are alleged to infringe in the exact same manner that has already been adjudicated to infringe. We disagree. The test for colorable differences is not divorced from the scope of the claim that has previously been found to have been infringed. Modifications that EchoStar made to its software based on what it alone considered to be the basis of the jury's infringement finding cannot guarantee the creation of substantial open issues with respect to infringement. Where the court is clearly convinced, based on evidence presented at trial, that there are no substantial open issues on continuing infringement of the asserted claims, we see no reason to disallow summary proceedings."

While EchoStar apparently strongly protested the district court's injunction, the two judges wondered why it didn't formally appeal that injunction. "The fact that there were numerous other issues on appeal cannot excuse its failure to appeal the injunction," the judges wrote. "Had EchoStar brought an appeal on the injunction, we could have addressed its legitimacy. The time to do so has long passed."

The EchoStar injunction applies to all of its DVRs, not just those two models; and in his dissent, Judge Rader called that injunction too broad and unfair. "Under its strained interpretation of its earlier injunction, the district court effectively required EchoStar to go into each of its customers' homes and physically remove each cable box containing any DVR functionality -- infringing or not! The trial court required this course of action even in the face of both parties' recognition that a satellite link could more easily remove or replace the 'infringing' technology. In other words, if EchoStar would enter each home and replace each of its cable boxes with identical cable boxes uploaded with the same software, it would escape contempt. These absurdities spring from the 'disablement provision,' [of the District Court order, which reads in part,] 'The DVR functionality, i.e., disable all storage to and playback from a hard disk drive of television data) [sic] shall not be enabled in any new placements of the Infringing Products.'"

Judge Rader didn't see how EchoStar changing its product to fulfill the same function as a TiVo, but in a different way, constituted contempt of a court order in favor of the way TiVo performed the function originally.

"In its redesign efforts, EchoStar eliminated its video frame start-code detection in its entirety," the dissenting judge wrote. "Rather than parsing through all the video and audio data before storing onto the system, the modified design, upon request from the user, statistically estimates where a given frame might appear long after storage of the video and audio data. This change was a critical component of a vast redesign effort by fifteen engineers working full time for over 800 total hours. Before proceeding, EchoStar got two separate approvals of this change from an independent law firm."

Judge Rader believes TiVo should not have been able to resurrect an old argument about what infringed what -- which TiVo itself rejected prior to EchoStar's software overhaul -- to apply to new software that wasn't the subject of the original claim. In his closing, he wrote, "If Tivo believes that Echostar's new design still infringes its patent, it should file a new infringement suit, not attempt to short circuit a full proceeding. In its current form, this decision discourages good faith efforts to design around an infringement verdict."

In celebrating its victory, TiVo released this statement early this afternoon: "This ruling paves the way for TiVo to receive the approximately $300 million in damages and contempt sanctions awarded to us for EchoStar's continued infringement through July 1, 2009. We will also seek further damages and contempt sanctions for the period of continued infringement thereafter. We will continue our efforts to protect our intellectual property from further infringement." Neither Dish Network nor EchoStar had released a comment at the time of this publication.

Comments

View comments by with a score of at least

The trivial pursuit of various companies relative to patent infringement is costing the public millions upon millions of dollars against the value of service. This case is no different. Seems to me that these companies are using rudimentary base design as a mark to seek damages against others who employ similar processes. I think this is wrong. The only people that suffer is the consumer and it appears the Courts could care less.

While TIVO is a legit company that has indeed provided innovative products and continues to do so, as opposed to the blood suckers who do not, there must be a point of time where common processes are declared public domain. The hair-pin example is instructive here. We need to put a timeline expiry on patents, so that innovation can proceed.

I think the Court is wrong in this decision.

Score: 0

|

What the hell? TiVo does not have a monopoly on DVR's. It is both legal and possible to make a DVR that does not infringe on any of TiVo's patents. Building a DVR does not require a license or any other form of permission from TiVo.

Score: -1

|

No TiVo does not have a monopoly on DVR's. Just a bunch of patents like every other technology company. Echostar should just either buck up and pay for a license or design a DVR that doesn't violate TiVo's patents. If I were Echostar I would just license the patent and be done with it. At least TiVo is using those patents in their products and just doesn't have them to make royalties off of them like some do.

Score: -1

|

As long as you remove the functionality of recording to a hard drive, and "pause/rewind live TV", then you can have a DVR all you want....

Though most people just call them VCRs or DVD Burners at that point. :-)

Score: -1

|

Okay, so when will my DVR stop working?

Score: 0

|
Below viewing threshold. Show

That's I left Dishnetwork they always have hidden charges on there DVR and Direc TV doesn't at all.

Score: -4

|

This is a totally false statement. You do get charged a DVR fee just the same as Dish Network. Except you get charged a seperate fee for each DVR you have and I get charged one fee for DVR whether I have 1 or 5 DVRs. Think before you speak troll.

Score: 0

|

@wicketr - Perhaps I wasn't clear. It is legal and possible to make a DVR that can record video and audio to a hard drive from live TV without violating TiVo's patents. That's what a DVR is: a recording device that records audio and video to a fixed disk drive. It's my understanding that Verizon also does not pay a licensing fee to TiVo for their DVR's they rent to FiOS customers. TiVo is in the wrong here since they do not have a broad patent that covers every single method of recording live TV to a hard disk. Comparing TiVo DVR's to Echostar's redesigned DVR's is like comparing SCO Unix to Linux.

Score: 0

|

You sure Last time I was with Dishnetwork in 08 our bill was toping 125 bucks a month that top 250 package with HD Gold TV package. We where paying 4-6 bucks a month fee for dvr recordering fee. I think. Plus right now with Direc tv it's 78 a month that with 3 receivers. It's Still alot Cheaper with Direc TV Why would you pay 125 a month for top 250 package while you can get cheaper with Direc TV for around 70 bucks a month that has HD with it?

Score: 0

|

Bottom line- This is why service is so expensive. Greed. I will never buy a Tivo for that reason alone. They are not engaged in a lawsuit to protect their intellectual property rights, they are engaged to gouge other companies & in turn gouge consumers.

I have lost all respect for Tivo.

Score: 1

|

Ping off to a rocky start as spam, issues plague service

Apple's foray into social music is not going well as its Ping service has come up against a multitude of problems.

Steve Jobs: 'Ping is for social music discovery'

Forget new Apple TV or iPods. Ping is by far the most game-changing new product announcement made by Apple today.

A look at new portable media players for Fall 2010 that aren't iPods

This year, in the days surrounding Apple's September 1 event, Sandisk, Phillips, Archos, and Samsung have all revealed new media players that will compete against the newly-refreshed 2010-2011 iPod line.

'Boxee Killer' Plex/Nine media center released, adds iOS app

Early Tuesday morning, a new version of Mac OS X-based media center software Plex was released, called Plex/Nine, and with it came a new app for iOS.

90's game hero Duke Nukem returns after delay of more than a decade

Friday, 2K Games and Gearbox Software announced they will be releasing Duke Nukem Forever on Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Windows PC in 2011. The game was first announced in 1997 and has long been considered the most legendary case of "vaporware."

Company of Heroes Online open beta launches, rewards early adopters

Video game company THQ has opened the beta of Company of Heroes Online, a free-to-play World War II strategy game based upon THQ's critically acclaimed real-time strategy franchise Company of Heroes, originally released for Windows in 2006.

Verizon offers prepaid data plans for smart phones

Verizon strengthened its prepaid offerings on Thursday, introducing prepay data plans for consumers who wish to use smart phones on a no contract basis.

Samsung bets on Galaxy Tab in race against Apple's iPad

In what could potentially be the first serious challenge to Apple's dominance in the tablet sector, Samsung Thursday debuted the Galaxy Tab, a 7-inch Android powered tablet device.

Toshiba recalls overheating and melting Satellite T-series notebooks

Thursday, the US Consumer Product Safety Commission and Health Canada announced a recall of three Toshiba Satellite T-series notebook computers: T135, T135D and ProT130, for reports that the units' AC adaptors cause them to overheat and melt.

First voice-over-LTE call placed in US public safety band

Telecommunications company Alcatel-Lucent Thursday announced that the first voice call in the 700MHz band of LTE has been completed.

Samsung: new wireless USB chips capable of 480Mbps max

Samsung Thursday announced its latest two-chip wireless USB solution capable of transmission speeds up to 480Mbps with an actual throughput rate of 200Mbps.