• Thanks for visiting the Kaleidescape Owners' Forum

    This forum is for the community of Kaleidescape owners, and others interested in learning about the system, equipment, services, and the company itself.

    It is run by a group of enthusiastic Kaleidescape owners and dealers purely as a service to this community.

    This board is not affiliated in any way with Kaleidescape, Inc.
    For official technical support, product information, or customer service, please visit www.kaleidescape.com

  • You are currently in "Guest" mode and not logged in with a registered account.

    The forum is free to use and most of the forum can be used by guests who are not registered....

    ... but we strongly encourage you to register for a full account. There is no cost to register for a full account.

    Benefits of registering for a full account:

    • Participate in the discussions! You must have a registered account to make posts on the forums. You will be able to start your own thread on a topic or question, or you can reply to other threads/discussions.
    • Use the "Conversation" feature (known as "private messaging" on other forums) to communicate directly with any of the other users here.
    • Access the Files area. The "resources" area of the forum contains many "Favorite Scene" and Script files that can dramatically increase the enjoyment of your Kaleidescape system. Go directly to great scenes in your favorite movies, created by other owners, and add automation to playback of your system with Scripts.
    • You won't see this annoying notice at the top of every screen!😊

    It's easy and free to register for the forum. Just click the "Register" button in the upper right corner of this page, and follow the instructions there.

Kaleidescape back in court in May 2011?

It would be good news if this complaint was resolved in kaleidescape's favour but as the statement indicates it may be many years until the matter is fully resolved.
 
This was expected. K won the first round, but an appeal sent it back to the lower court for retrial on the main issue. Still hoping for a settlement, but this could also drag out in court for many years.

In any case, I'm not at all concerned and I'm moving right along with my BR collection.:)


Jim
 
great article and an interesting workaround. How they handle this on a larger scale will be interesting...they actually are not taking new "members"...you have to join a waitlist. They need more equipment for sure. If they get popular, I would think the logistics of pulling this off would be pretty tough.

But they are using physical DVD's that they buy and streaming them to people who are paying to rent them. How is this different than mailing the DVD's that they buy to consumers...."First Sale Doctrine" allows this. The delivery method will be challenged...at some point.

Kind of like Spectravision for a country versus just one hotel!
 
bleair said:
I realize members here don't appreciate streaming services, but this editorial about a streaming service called zediva

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/17/technology/personaltech/17pogue.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&src=twr

might make for an interesting follow on case to Kalediescape's. Zediva is using real dvds that they own in real dvd players to stream movies to you. A court case for them can't be long in coming.
Click to expand...

No long at all.... Here is the expected lawsuit from the MPAA

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-mpaa-sues-zediva-dvd-streaming-service/
 
It was easy to see that coming. Some people just have to kick the sleeping dog.....



Jim
 
The DVD Copy Control Association has requested a further delay of the second trial of their complaint that Kaleidescape, Inc. has breached its CSS License agreement. We have granted their request. We now expect to return to the trial court in Santa Clara County, California later this year.
 
I guess with their slew of lawyers, 7 years wasn't enough time to prepare their case. I actually think they just want this to drag out as long as possible as a warning to others, which works better than if they lose in a quick trial.
 
Interesting. There shouldn't be any reason to delay if the DVDCCA actually has a case, unless Mr. Poindexter is correct - that the risk of losing outweighs the chilling effect they currently enjoy.

As I recall, the first trial was kinda lukewarm on both sides. There were dueling expert witnesses saying there was harm/no harm to the DVDCCA for this method of copying. From what I remembered, neither side presented a compelling argument for prevailing.
 
TomBarnett said:
The DVD Copy Control Association has requested a further delay of the second trial of their complaint that Kaleidescape, Inc. has breached its CSS License agreement. We have granted their request. We now expect to return to the trial court in Santa Clara County, California later this year.
Click to expand...

I won't pretend to know law, but unless you guys are working on a settlement, how could this benefit kscape? I suppose if you are unsure about your prospects, delaying it could help, but I only see this helping THEM (as others have pointed out).

No response necessary as you likely can't comment, but just wanted to voice that.
 
Well, I don't necessarily know if it is hurting Kaleidescape. Their sales are still strong and it is preventing new competitors from entering the marketplace. One fear I would have if I were them is that they win in a landslide and Apple says, great, here is the new and improved AppleTV box that does all Kaleidescape does at a lower price, followed by a couple others increasing the competition. Being first might be great, but where are ReplayTV and TiVo now in the great DVR market? Being first often means paying all the costs and developing the market only to fear being shot in the back by a Johnny come lately.

If the status quo is mutually beneficial, I don't expect either side to really look to settle unless a very favorable deal is reached and why would the other side give that much? No matter how this case is resolved, the loser will appeal. All this is going to determine is who gets home court advantage on the next step - the appeal. In that, we saw that the DVD CCA didn't back down so they probably cannot afford to have a ruling against them. Kaleidescape certainly cannot have DVD taken off the menu right now. Hell, I couldn't buy enough MDV's to cover my DVD collection and buying 4 IDV's just for DVD sounds like a whole lot of suck too so I doubt that Kaleidescape can really accept defeat.

No, I suspect this case will drag out as long as possible and will be decided finally once it is no longer relevant. Remember, the MPAA isn't just fighting against DVD serving but against media servers in general. They don't embrace new technology unless it helps them sell new things and charge more money, like 3D has been doing for them.
 
Mr.Poindexter said:
Well, I don't necessarily know if it is hurting Kaleidescape. Their sales are still strong and it is preventing new competitors from entering the marketplace. One fear I would have if I were them is that they win in a landslide and Apple says, great, here is the new and improved AppleTV box that does all Kaleidescape does at a lower price, followed by a couple others increasing the competition. Being first might be great, but where are ReplayTV and TiVo now in the great DVR market? Being first often means paying all the costs and developing the market only to fear being shot in the back by a Johnny come lately.
Click to expand...

To that I say: great. That can only be great for the consumers. Too many companies get slow and complacent. Competition spurs innovation. I don't own Kscape stock, so if someone comes along and does what they do, but better and cheaper, I'm going for it.
 
It can only be great for consumers if it happens. The issue is that if it happens and the innovator was forced out of business because of the high cost of innovation and building a market to then lose the market to new players, it is less likely to see a company or person invest in the next great challenge.

I am all for innovation and competition. I just don't want to see players that should be rewarded instead take the fall because they were first and incurred the highest costs - especially when said costs are largely legal costs. Imagine if Sony went under because of the cost of litigating for their Betamax which paved the way for home video. Had that happened, how many great inventions would never come to light because companies don't want to take the risk.

Better and cheaper is great, but to date everybody that has come along with better and cheaper has also failed to stay in business so I might not be so fast to make that jump.
 
The civil courts in California are so backed up now due to budget constraints that I hear it may take up to 6 months to get a divorce hearing. I don't expect this trial to move forward very fast at this point and given the status quo we have, both sides may want it that way.

It is obvious that the lawsuit hasn't really stopped Kaleidescape so they are not too bothered by it and since there have been no new competitors to Kaleidescape the DVD CCA may be happy with ongoing litigation as being enough of a threat to stop their dam from crumbling.

The article from a while ago:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/201...ther-casualty-court-budget-cuts-san-francisco
 
Yeah, I would have thought that if there was more concern regarding Kaleidescape, that the lawsuit would have been pursued more aggressively.
 
Having litigated many cases over the years, this is a case that should eventually settle. In the meantime I agree with Mike that the possible deterrent affect by having it open has some value to the CCA.

I gave up any concern in this area quite awhile ago.



Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top