 |
 | markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
 ·Charter Pipeline
| Re: 2 types of patents at issue The whole patent system is a travesty. Its needs overhauled like whoah.
People will lose patents in the process of the overhaul, because BS patents will be void and lawsuits that went with them will be overturned is why it is a hard thing to just do.
Lots of competition in the US is not happening in the technology/medical sector because of bogus patent claims..having a patent on a drug or machine that can save millions but is confined to one person that sells said machine for millions each is not a good patent system. | |
|
| battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000 | Maybe I should patent the method of suing your competition when all else fails. | |
|
| | 
dodgetech2
join:2002-01-01
Gouldsboro, PA
 ·Vonage
| Re: 2 types of patents at issue said by battleop  :Maybe I should patent the method of suing your competition when all else fails. I'm pretty sure Verizon already got that patent..:) | |
|
| | | pop007
join:2003-07-01
Allentown, PA | Re: 2 types of patents at issue I think Bill Gates is the KING of that Patent! | |
|
| floydb_1982
join:2004-08-25
Kent, WA
·Comcast
| Verizon is making a big deal out of nothing. Shame on the part of Verizon for all the worthless troubles they have caused. Before you know it this who thing with Verizon and Charter will be over real quick and after that people will forget this whole stupid suit. | |
|
| 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Netcong, NJ
| said by TK Junk Mail :The "Method" patents claims are BS. The fact that the patent bureau allows these types of patents is a travesty. Allowing someone to patent STEPS in a process could block all competition in any industry making anything. Oh no, another post that I totally 100% agree with.
I think this whole mess is also stifling innovation stateside in a sector that we need to grow, not shrink. | |
|
supergirl
join:2007-03-20
Pensacola, FL
·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
·Skype
| VZ better make all its arguments the same I think they'll lose against Charter and Cox. Wonder if VZ sues all the cable outfits within the next few months? Cox is going to be a brawl so I'm sure suing Comcast would be a war. Cox has money; sure Comcast is analyzing these lawsuits.
The suit against Cox raises the question of whether Verizon will go after other Cable MSOs in court as well. "They all adhere to the CableLabs PacketCable architecture," says Alan Breznick, senior analyst with Heavy Reading. "So conceivably they could."
»www.lightreading.com/document.as···site=cdn
PacketCable is a CableLabs-led initiative to develop interoperable interface specifications for delivering advanced, real-time multimedia services over two-way cable plant. Built on top of the industry's highly successful DOCSIS® cable modem infrastructure (version 1.1 or greater), PacketCable networks use Internet protocol (IP) technology to enable a wide range of multimedia services, such as IP telephony, multimedia conferencing, interactive gaming, and general multimedia applications. Working with CableLabs member companies and technology suppliers, the PacketCable project addresses issues such as device interoperability and product compliance with the PacketCable specifications.
While no CableLabs member company is obligated to purchase PacketCable-compliant products, it is anticipated that the majority of network components purchased will be PacketCable compliant.
»www.packetcable.com/
Member Companies
CableLabs' members are exclusively cable system operators. They do not include competitive network platforms such as direct broadcast satellite (DBS), telephone companies delivering video services, electrical utilities delivering broadband services, multi-channel multipoint distribution systems (MMDS) or the like. Nor do they include manufacturers or content providers (such as cable programmers, broadcasters or movie studios). Our members are located in the United States, Canada, Mexico, South America, Europe and Asia.
Current as of 02/07/08
Access Communications (Canada)
Armstrong Utilities, Inc.
Atlantic Broadband
Aurora Cable TV, Ltd. (Canada)
BendBroadband
Bresnan Communications
Bright House Networks
Buckeye Cablevision, Inc.
Buford Media Group, LLC
Cable America Corporation
Cable Cable Inc.
Cable de Tula, S.A. de C.V. (“Cablemas”) (Mexico)
Cable One, Inc.
Cablevision Systems Corporation
Campbell River TV Association (“CRTV”) (Canada)
CCS, LLC d/b/a Community Cable Service
Chambers Communications Corporation
Charter Communications, Inc.
Cogeco Cable, Inc. (Canada)
Comcast Cable Communications, Inc.
Cox Communications, Inc.
CRRS-TV (Canada)
EastLink (Canada)
FamilyView Cablevision
General Communications, Inc. (“GCI”)
Insight Communications Company
Lake Hughes Cable
JetBroadband
Liberty Global Inc.
Massillon Cable TV, Inc.
MCT Communications, Inc.
Mediacom Communications Corporation
Midcontinent Communications
Mountain Cablevision Ltd. (Canada)
Princetown Cable Company
Rogers Cable, Inc. (Canada)
Seaside Communications (Canada)
Shaw Communications Inc. (Canada)
StarHub (Singapore)
Suddenlink (“Cequel III”)
Sunflower Broadband
Tele-Media Corporation
Time Warner Cable
Tri-County Communications Corporation
Valley Cable TV, Inc.
Vidéotron Ltée (Canada)
Westman Communications Group (Canada)
WinDBreak Cable
»www.cablelabs.com/about/companies/
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: VZ better make all its arguments the same Comcast is too big for Verizon to take on even if they are even slightly infringing. comcast probally has the money to simply buy Verizon if they wanted.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | 
Pathfinder
Dazed Confused
Premium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: VZ better make all its arguments the same said by Kearnstd :comcast probally has the money to simply buy Verizon if they wanted. I don't see that here!
Verizon
Income Statement
Revenue (ttm): 93.47B
Revenue Per Share (ttm): 32.253
Qtrly Revenue Growth (yoy): 18.30%
Gross Profit (ttm): 53.15B
EBITDA (ttm): 30.91B
Net Income Avl to Common (ttm): 5.51B
Diluted EPS (ttm): 1.90
Qtrly Earnings Growth (yoy): 3.90%
Balance Sheet
Total Cash (mrq): 3.40B
Total Cash Per Share (mrq): 1.181
Total Debt (mrq): 31.16B
Total Debt/Equity (mrq): 0.616
Current Ratio (mrq): 0.756
Book Value Per Share (mrq): 17.580999
Cash Flow Statement
Operating Cash Flow (ttm): 25.74B
Levered Free Cash Flow (ttm): 4.83B
Comcast
Income Statement
Revenue (ttm): 29.91B
Revenue Per Share (ttm): 9.61
Qtrly Revenue Growth (yoy): 21.00%
Gross Profit (ttm): 15.96B
EBITDA (ttm): 11.34B
Net Income Avl to Common (ttm): 2.41B
Diluted EPS (ttm): 0.75
Qtrly Earnings Growth (yoy): -54.00%
Balance Sheet
Total Cash (mrq): 3.01B
Total Cash Per Share (mrq): 0.981
Total Debt (mrq): 31.10B
Total Debt/Equity (mrq): 0.743
Current Ratio (mrq): 0.805
Book Value Per Share (mrq): 13.63
Cash Flow Statement
Operating Cash Flow (ttm): 7.51B
Levered Free Cash Flow (ttm): 1.80B | |
|
| | 
ChrisXP
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
Premium
join:2002-12-13
USA
| said by Kearnstd :Comcast is too big for Verizon to take on even if they are even slightly infringing. comcast probally has the money to simply buy Verizon if they wanted. At the rates they charge each month for cable and internet? The whole industry!
I thought there was suppose to be competition. Only other cable provider in my area doesn't even have a line out here.
No competition, no lower rates. Customers screwed.
Heck, we're screwed as guess who'll have to pay for these lawsuits? 
--
Zionism is a crime
»www.jewsagainstzionism.com »www.christianzionism.org | |
|
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Yep. Cox is private. If you sue Comcast, prepare to find yourself under an irrelavent anti-trust investigation quickly. When billionaires/millionaries/inventment banks/hedge funds get angry at you, it doesn't matter what company you are. They know enough connections to kill you instantly, or the CEO gets fired by the board with no comment. | |
|
| | irsean
join:2001-05-10
Redlands, CA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by Kearnstd :comcast probally has the money to simply buy Verizon if they wanted. RIIIIIGHT!!!
 | |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA | Quick precedents Verizon is trying to get some quick precedents regarding their patents set before going after Comcast's and Time Warner Cable's phone services. | |
|
| wildcat man
join:2007-11-03
Kansas City, MO | Re: Quick precedents Isn't Time Warner somewhat protected, however, by Sprint's VoIP patent portfolio? That would cover others as well. | |
|
| | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA | Re: Quick precedents Maybe, but the more court wins and settlements Verizon gets the stronger their patent claims become. | |
|
| | | JohnA
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Pittsburgh, PA
| Re: Quick precedents The precedents, all the way through a full set of appeals, are set. All the other providers of voip sat on their hands, as if Verizon was just mad at Vonage, rather than rally around them for the sake of the technology. Now they're all on VZ, S, and T's list, and undoing the precedents looks near impossible.
The patents are written in such a way, that everyone that terminates a voip call to VZ (landline) or S (wireless) violates them. T's patent is for a packet phone system, so they can sue just about anyone today. The irony of all of this is that the old T (pre-SBC merger) is responsible for cable companies getting into the phone business (PSTN) in the first place, while they were in the cable business.
A couple more court wins will set the precedents in stone, and make it not worthwhile to defend against them, unless the telcos actually try to make injunctions stick, rather than license the IP.
(aside) I expect them to eventually take a run at Neutral Tandem, a recent IPO that's turned making these connections into a service, to invalidate at least the voip portion of what they do. | |
|
| | | | fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| Re: Quick precedents said by JohnA :The irony of all of this is that the old T (pre-SBC merger) is responsible for cable companies getting into the phone business (PSTN) in the first place, while they were in the cable business. No, AT&T wasn't responsible as you stated. Comcast, MediaOne, TCI, and others were getting into Telephone before AT&T Broadband purchased MediaOne. (It was at that point where AT&T Broadband was pushing telephony in the systems they purchased in some areas) I can point you to cable systems in the bay area that were serving telephone back in 1996, well before AT&T Broadband was formed. | |
|
| | | | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
| said by JohnA :A couple more court wins will set the precedents in stone, and make it not worthwhile to defend against them, unless the telcos actually try to make injunctions stick, rather than license the IP. Completely agree and think that Verizon is after cash here rather than stopping VOIP. | |
|
| | | | | wildcat man
join:2007-11-03
Kansas City, MO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Quick precedents I think it may be more than the cash. On the Time Warner Cable earnings conference call this week, they mentioned that Albany market continued to be one of (the?) fastest growing market in their systems with nearly 30% penetration of homes passed. We'll hear more from Cablevision in a few weeks, but my guess is they are holding their own on residential (32-35% penetration of homes passed), and their small business efforts are also taking off. They cannot beat them with DSL (re: Embarq had more DSL adds than Verizon), and FiOS successful but confined (and, perhaps not affordable to the masses). In short, VZ (wireline) in it for survival and their network economics collapse without less competition. | |
|
Edward1978
join:2007-07-23
De Soto, IL
·Verizon Online DSL
| It is all about $$ Lots of competition in the US is not happening in the technology/medical sector because of bogus patent claims..having a patent on a drug or machine that can save millions but is confined to one person that sells said machine for millions each is not a good patent system.
You know why, the US is filled with money hungery people. Just imagine if the oil & coal industries didn't have a hold on the market. More solar power, wind powr, hydroelectric power, electric/veg. oil/ethonol (sp) cars/trucks/busses. I am sure there is a lot more I can't think off. | |
|
| 
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
Gainesville, FL
| Re: It is all about $$ said by Edward1978 :Lots of competition in the US is not happening in the technology/medical sector because of bogus patent claims..having a patent on a drug or machine that can save millions but is confined to one person that sells said machine for millions each is not a good patent system. It's called "innovation" say our patent system were reformed and you could not patent drugs or medical devices well then suddenly the "innovation" level in this country would drop to zero.
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 | |
|
majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY
| Couldnt the cablecompanies retaliate? Shouldnt verizon be carefull who they sue. Dont some of the cable companies own channels that verizon and its customers would like to get on fios tv ?So if they sue time warner,comcast,and cablevision couldnt these companies make it awfully hard for verzion in respect to their channels? | |
|
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Re: Couldnt the cablecompanies retaliate? Verizon could sue them under collusion/anti-competitive laws if they outright refuse, since they would have no legitimate reason to be able to reject Verizon from buying access to those channels. Now if they want to charge $20 for AMC and another $20 for Bravo and $50 for E!. Thats legal. | |
|
| | majortom1029
join:2006-10-19
Lindenhurst, NY | Re: Couldnt the cablecompanies retaliate? Then wouldnt doing this so that only tel coms can have phone be anti competitive also? | |
|
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | Re: Couldnt the cablecompanies retaliate? But the whole point of a patent is to prevent competition/have a monopoly. Patents are a joke, I should make one for how you wipe your ass, I patent using the right hand, perhaps my competitor can patent using the left hand. | |
|
|
DemonChicken
join:2006-10-15
Boon, MI | Dubya Tee Eff? Can charter even afford this lawsuit? | |
|
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
| Re: Dubya Tee Eff? said by DemonChicken :Can charter even afford this lawsuit? The only thing Charter can afford now is to refinance its debt. If Charter can't persuade its creditors to reduce the crushing interest payments it's Chapter 11 time. | |
|
cork1958
Cork
join:2000-02-26
Fruitport, MI | The American way! The American way to prosperity!!  | |
|
Trinijoy
Premium
join:2005-09-12
Brick, NJ | Yes Okay this was predictable... | |
|
|
|
|
|
Verizon Adds Charter To Its List of Lawsuits
2 types of patents at issue
VZ (CAN I SUE YOU NOW) ?
Ops