back to article Virgin Media wins ELEVENTH patent case against Rovi

After eleven claims and seven years, Virgin has won an eleventh patent dispute with Rovi over the design of its user interface after Rovi withdrew the claim of patent infringement. The specific claim was for Electronic Programme Guide software using information downloaded from the internet. The patent is now marked as having …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Meh

    Rovi...

    ...what's the point asking them to pay. They'll just dissolve and start up over again as Rovi2.0.

    Still nice to see the share prices going down on a regular basis.

    1. John G Imrie
      Happy

      Re: Rovi...

      It's nice to see the Vulture Capitalists getting burnt as well.

  2. ArgBlarg

    If they don't pay

    Virgin can request all their patent chest as remedie.

    1. Alistair

      Re: If they don't pay

      @ArgBlarg

      Apparently the patent chest isn't worth the paper its printed on..............

      1. Tom 13

        Re: isn't worth the paper its printed on

        True, but as long as you aren't actually paying for it, it might at least save you future court costs.

  3. colinb

    Reminds me of a saying

    Veni, Sequere, Rovi

    I came, I sued, I got screwed

  4. streaky

    These are the clowns..

    Who used to be known as Macrovision. Yes, that one.

    They're also the clowns who bought divx for 750 million USD - a product that as far as I've ever been able to work out has only really ever been used for piracy around the time when said pirates were all moving in droves to Matroska and h/x264 (and very few home users licensed it anyway). Either way, one of the dumbest acquisitions in history in both purpose and value (yes even when you start throwing Yahoo into the mix).

    These are the clowns who think you can stop even casual content buyers from ripping media with copy protection methods that aren't even slightly secure (macrovision, ripguard et al).

    Their product line was at best idiotic and at worst fraudulent (totally relied on legal means - i.e. courts/laws - and not technical means to actually prevent copying) - and reading this patent, if it's anything to go by, their patent library is even worse.

    1. MJI Silver badge

      Macraprovision

      Yes let them go bust, bunch of crooks.

      But they did manage to con quite a few companies into buying their useless copy protextion system. And at the same time piss off a few high end monitor users.

      Oh an Macraprovision has never stopped me copying something I wanted to copy,

  5. Morrie Wyatt

    Next step

    Ask the court to declare them as a vexatious litigant

    After that, they need to apply for court permission before throwing sue balls.

    1. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: Next step

      Seconded

      "After that, they need to apply for court permission before throwing sue balls."

      They'd need to apply for court permission before even _hinting_ at throwing sue balls.

  6. Nineteen

    Loser Pays Rule

    This whole thing makes a good case for the Loser Pays Rule. It's much more practical to stand up against extortion via predatory lawsuits when winning the case won't cost you just as much as losing.

    1. Tom 13

      Re: Loser Pays Rule

      Except it won't work out that way. Vexation troll sues small company that can't afford a the sort of legal defense needed to win these cases and when the troll wins, the small company has to pay their fees. That only emboldens the patent trolls which is the exact opposite of what we want.

      The right way to fix it is:

      1) Fix US patent law so the sorts of patents that generate the suits is reduced.

      2) Fix the US patent office so their case officers actually review the patents and have some knowledge relevant to the area.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022