Upload
vernon-cobb
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
IEOR 190G: Patent Engineering
Sarah C. Kabiling
Is this just “method and system” for digitizing video onto a hard-disk for random-access playback by user? Not just a replacement for a videotape Not just putting in Hard-Drive Could you record to and playback from
random locations on that video tape at the same time? No! TiVo is much more than a replacement.
Allows subscribers to play one television show while recording another and contains storage format that allows pausing LIVE TV!
TIME WARPING!
TiVo alleged that Echostar’s set-top boxes were in violation of a patent for a “multimedia time warping system”
Interruption Tolerant Video Program Viewing (‘186)
Multimedia Direct Access Storage Device and Formatting Method (‘804 and ‘685)
Technology in question: Time Warping – the ability for customers to watch one show,
while recording another
Hardware Relate to the process and apparatus used to effect time shifting
according to the invention Accepting, Storing, Converting, Tuning signal Storage of TV programs as MPEG data enables users to control
playback of programs (currently broadcasted – use pause, fast forward, reverse)
Software Relate software processes and apparatus Buffing, decoding, separation of streams Storage, transformation, and decoding
How data was placed and moved Data streams
Accused DVRs both receive television signals and store data relating to the transmission on a hard disk in Motion Picture Expert Group (MPEG) format.
MPEG stream – interleaved audio and video components
Number of steams How streams separated
Video Audio
Acquiring Wording: “a/an” for different streams
How data was processed (extracted) Data streams
Source object Transform object Sink object Control object Wording: “object”
EchoStar wants definition to be item within a computer program (like C++)
TiVo wants “collection of data and operations” (IEEE)
EchoStar was given an injunction for the duration of the trial.
An equitable remedy in the form of a court order, where a party is required to do, or to refrain from doing, certain acts
For TiVo’s case, Judge decided upon injunction because TiVo was “losing market share at a critical time in the market’s development, market share that it will not have the same opportunity to capture once the market matures”
During trial, EchoStar cannot sell any more DVRs (which are in question)
Verdict important because it is “likely to shape competition in market for digital video recorders” (Wall Street Journal)
April 2006 $74M Initial jury verdict $33M lost profits from lost sales of set-top boxes $41M royalties for >4 million DVR devices
August 2006 increase to $90M Permanent injunction
Very rare EchoStar must shut off infringing DVRs in homes within
30 days of settlement EchoStar granted stay (refrain from permanent
injunction until court can consider appeal) TiVo spent $10.7M for legal costs fighting EchoStar