EchoStar Tries To Time-Shift TiVo Patent Injunction
from the without-appeal dept
A few months back, TiVo won a super fast decision against EchoStar in their patent lawsuit, claiming that EchoStar's DISH DVR service infringed on their patents. Today, the judge granted an injunction against EchoStar, saying they needed to disable those DVRs. This comes just a few months after the Supreme Court noted that injunctions should only be used in specific cases where there's real harm to the patent owner to allow the sales of the competing devices to continue. In this case, that's quite difficult to show, considering that TiVo didn't even bother to sue EchoStar for many years after DISH was offering their DVR. Even worse, this court (which is notorious for quickly siding with patent owners) has said EchoStar can't even wait on the injunction until an appeal is heard -- something the appeals court has already said is ridiculous, allowing the injunction to be stayed. However, having the lower court claim that it can't be stayed is ridiculous. Allowing injunctions to be stayed until appeal is pretty standard, and makes sense. If it turns out that the case is overturned on appeal, then the injunction could do plenty of harm to EchoStar in the meantime -- mostly by pissing off a ton of customers who have been happily using the DVR for years. This is one of the big problems with injunctions in patent cases like this one. If the company has been found to infringe -- and the appeals have been exhausted, then the patent holder can be made whole via a fine. If DISH had been forced to turn off their DVRs in the middle of the process, it would have forced EchoStar's hand without allowing them to exhaust their legal process to show why they're not infringing. They almost certainly would have been forced to settle with TiVo to keep their DVRs working -- even if they didn't believe they infringed, and when they believe they're likely to be vindicated. It's a perfect example of why kneejerk injunctions are actually bad for consumers and bad for innovation.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
1st
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Breaking (?) news
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Breaking (?) news
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Haven't you noticed...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Flipside of the coin
While it may not be true in this case, if the patentholder is SO materially damaged by the infringement that it leads to the holder's going out of business, no fine will ever remedy it becuase they'll run out of money before they can be awarded such a fine in court. Unfortunately, the courts don't continue to press your case on your behalf if you run out of money/lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
injunction worthy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sheesh, talk about people who only are one-sided. Anti-Patent holder.... some of these suits are actually legitimate and not just sucking for undue monies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tivo and Echostar...
So don't go feeling all sorry for Echostar, they caused the problem now must deal with the consequences.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Tivo and Echostar...
Actually, the judge found the opposite. He found that it was not willful infringement, which is why he didn't triple damages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PATENT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it goes both ways
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: it goes both ways
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: it goes both ways
[ link to this | view in chronology ]