CLICK TO EXPAND

Phosita IP Blog

RUMORS OF THE ANTICIPATED XBOX 720 INCORPORATING A DVR SYSTEM COME IN THE MIDST OF A SWIRL OF LITIGATION INVOLVING DIGITAL VIDEO RECORDING TECHNOLOGY.

As reported by Gamezone on January 4, a new rumor has surfaced about the development of the next generation Xbox, or Xbox 720 – a clever twist on the current Xbox 360 title, due to a patent recently granted to Microsoft. 

United States Patent No. 8,083,593 was issued on December 27, 2011, and describes the implementation of a DVR system allowing for the recording of media, including television programs. The following abstract briefly describes the DVR application as implemented in the new system:

                “An integrated gaming and media experience is disclosed, including recording of content on a gaming console. A digital video recorder (DVR) application running alongside a television client component allows users to record media content on the gaming console. The DVR application also integrates itself with the console menu. Once integrated, users can record media content while playing games. Alternatively, users can record content when the gaming console is turned off. The recorded content can include television programming, gaming experience (whether local or online), music, DVDs, and so on. When in the recording state, users can also switch between various other media modes, whether gaming, television, and so on.”

Although the new Xbox 720 sounds pretty cool, this patent gives rise to yet another issue in the current controversy between Microsoft and TiVo regarding digital video recorder (DVR) technology. As you may have heard, Microsoft filed a lawsuit back in January 2011 and in subsequent motions alleged that TiVo violated seven of Microsoft’s patents concerning digital video recording.  There is currently, however, a stay on the case due to the court’s having granted TiVo’s request for reexamination of the allegedly infringing patents. See Microsoft Corp. v. Tivo Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52619 (N.D. Cal., May 6, 2011).

What really makes this interesting is that AT&T (one of Microsoft’s major customers) was sued in 2009 for infringing TiVo’s DVR patents 6,233,389, 7,493,015, and 7,529,465 which ultimately resulted in a settlement on January 3, 2012.  Forbes reports that TiVo will receive approximately $215 million from AT&T with $51 million up front and recurring quarterly payments until 2018 to cover the rest. To add to the controversy, it has been suggested that Microsoft filed its suit in January 2011 in response to TiVo’s suit against AT&T because AT&T’s technology runs Microsoft’s Mediaroom client software. Thus, it raises the question that since AT&T settled and AT&T’s technology uses Microsoft’s technology, is it still feasible that Microsoft could win its suit against TiVo and be able to defend against TiVo’s counterclaim of patent infringement? Although I have not researched in depth the patents at issue in these cases, the settlement by AT&T, if anything, might shed some light on how Microsoft’s case will unfold once reexamination is complete.
Now back to the important stuff: video games. In light of all this litigation surrounding DVR technology, it seems like the video game community might have to wait even longer than the 2013-2015 projected release date of the Xbox 720 so that Microsoft can incorporate the rumored DVR feature without the risk of impending litigation. If Microsoft ends up winning the suit against TiVo before then, however, I, for one, hope that Microsoft passes some of the winnings on to the consumer in the form of discounted prices for the new system.

 Image by Fanchile on Flickr Creative Commons- some rights reserved.

TAGS:

CLICK TO EXPAND

DC On Film Row

About DC on Film Row

DC on Film Row is a free event space open to everyone in our community.

We like to say that the space is a “home for creatives and innovators, home builders and the homeless, celebrators and the celebrated” so people understand that we are inclusive and want everyone from throughout our community using our space.

Our goal is to celebrate the incredible diversity of creativity, innovation, and passion within Oklahoma City and to provide a venue—free of charge—to those groups and individuals working to bind us all together and make our home a cooler and better place. No strings attached—no extensive rules to follow. We simply ask that all of our neighbors be honored and that all viewpoints be respected. Our criteria for use is simple: If the event, group, or meeting is something which strengthens our community and brings us all together, the space is available for use.

The space has hosted everything from charitable fundraisers to an underground nightclub party to celebrate Canterbury Choral Society’s 45th anniversary season. We host dinners for the OKC homeless population most Monday evenings where upwards of 250 people are served—we provide the space and soft drinks and a local church provides the food. We’ve hosted university planning retreats and monthly local rock concerts.

Every Wednesday, we open up the courtyard for lunch, invite a local food truck to set up outside our gates, and welcome our downtown neighbors into the space for a bit of socialization.

Our never-ending soda fountain seems to be the biggest hit with some of our neighbors while others spend time playing pool or simply chatting about what is happening on the weekend.

For October we turn the space into a haunted house and invite the neighborhood children to come out and trick-or-treat.

Got an idea for how to use the space? Just ask us – we’re almost certain to say yes!

Julie L. Langdon’s Article Published in GEN—Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Julie L. Langdon’s Article Published in GEN—Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

On December 17, 2015, GEN published “Potential Patenting Challenges for 3D Printed Organs,” authored by Julie L. Langdon.  Julie’s article offers a review of recent court decisions providing insight into the patent eligibility of 3D organs.   Julie concluded, “It appears that neither Section 33(a) of the AIA or Section 101 of the Patent Act will interfere with patent claims directed to 3D organs or bioprinting; however, as the laws continue to evolve, and 3D organs become more advanced and more like real organs, these are issues that should be re-visited.”

Dunlap Codding Listed As One Of The Fastest Firms At The U.S. Patent Office

Dunlap Codding was recently identified as the second fastest patent firm at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for inventions falling within a broad range of technologies, including fields as diverse as organic chemistry, fuel cells, adhesives, and food (Technology Center 1700).  Juristat—Moneyball for Lawyers—designated this ranking based on the average amount of time required for completing the patenting process at the USPTO.  The average amount of time from filing to completion for all technology categories at the USPTO is 35.8 months; with the average time for TC 1700 being 36.6 months.  Dunlap Codding’s average elapsed time was 30.5 months, more than six months faster than the average.  

Other firms ranked among the top ten were Jones Day (#10), Merchant Gould (#4), Pepper Hamilton (#3), and Porter Hedges (#1).  Juristat chose firms from IP Today’s top firms for 2015 which had at least 100 disposed patent applications in the technology center. 

Nick Rouse, Dunlap Codding’s Managing Director, noted that Juristat’s findings underscored one of the firm’s key values:  nimble, prompt, responsive service to clients.  “We get results quickly because of our in-depth experience at the USPTO and understanding of the underlying technologies covered by TC 1700.” 

Dunlap Codding Director Jordan Sigale Quoted in Article on “Benchslaps”

Bill Donahue authored an article on copyright beatdowns and benchslaps in Law360 on November 20.  “No matter the area of law, frustration appears to be the common factor behind the phenomenon that has come to be known as the “benchslap.””  Donahue added: “Judges see a lot nonsensical behavior from the attorneys and clients who enter their courtrooms, and the vast majority of the time, they respond in the measured, equitable fashion that their position of power demands. But every once and a while, things bubble over.”

“Judges see a lot of questionable lawsuits,” said Jordan Sigale, an intellectual property litigator with the firm Dunlap Codding. “Their dockets are getting larger, and what we expect of these people involves a heck of a lot of work for not so much pay.”

Commenting on judges using colorful language in the face of apparently bogus lawsuits, Sigale  also said, “It could have been one frivolous complaint too many that week, and she saw an opportunity to have some fun with it,” Sigale said. “It seems like a good way to not melt down.”