Microsoft filed a writ of certiorari in hopes the US Supreme Court will review their appeal against i4i. According to the courts, Microsoft infringed on i4i patent 5787449, a patent that defines a “system and method for the separate manipulation of the architecture and content of a document, particularly for data representation and transformations.” The more »

If you have Cablevision, then you probably know about its remote DVR features, which allow you to record TV shows remotely for later viewing within Cablevision offices. Previously, there was a petition questioning the legality of remote DVR usage which reached the Supreme Court. Once there, the United States Supreme Court disposed of the petition, a move greatly appreciated by the CEA.

CEO and President of CEA, Gary Shapiro, had this to say about the remote DVR technology, “The ability to record television programming has become commonplace to millions of Americans which has benefited consumers and allowed the consumer technology and content industries to contribute billions of dollars to our economy and create millions of jobs.”

He goes on further to say that it doesn’t matter how you record shows, whether it be a box, or in an office. Another argument used by Shapiro is the fact that Apple and Google already offer similar services, so it makes sense that remote DVR technology such as this is allowed to prosper.

This always seemed like an odd case. Why would remote DVRs be illegal when regular DVRs were legal? If you had a very long cable between your hard drive and your set top box, that would be illegal? With the Supreme Court denying to review the lower court’s decision, expect more cable providers to start setting up remote DVR functionality. Just imagine never filling up your hard drive space on your DVR. Or just imagine the cable companies telling you that you get 5 hours of DVR space and for a fee you can get more space. Hmm…one of those options seems a lot more realistic than the other.

TiVo has won their patent infringement lawsuit against Dish Network. The DVR service provider claimed victory after the Supreme Court refused to hear Dish Network’s request to invalidate the 2006 Texas District Court ruling that Dish was indeed guilty of violating TiVo’s patent for the technology that allows a TV viewer to tape a program while watching another.

TiVo filed suit in 2004, saying Dish (then known as EchoStar) was violating its patent for the technology, known as “time warping.” The court agreed and awarded them a settlement totaling nearly $74 million. Dish immediately filed an appeal but lost.