Vizio SLAPPED with multiple lawsuits

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Pixie, you betta take your take your vizio and run fer the hills, Sony, Samsung, Mitsubishi are coming fer ya.

Seems that Vizio can rake in the money, but they do not like to pay liscensing fee's. Apex, and Cyberhome are not around for these very reasons


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Ec&refer=japan

[GMichael]

Uht oh. I predict that this will not end well.

[bobsticks]

Jim Noyd best hope not to land in jail...in China.

[Rich-n-Texas]

Wow! That's a drag!

[techjunkie]

Pixie, you betta take your take your vizio and run fer the hills, Sony, Samsung, Mitsubishi are coming fer ya.

Seems that Vizio can rake in the money, but they do not like to pay liscensing fee's. Apex, and Electrohome are not around for these very reason.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Ec&refer=japan

This is not as black & white as the Bloomberg article would have you believe.
Of course, Bloomberg is big business anyway.

The fine print : http://www.digitimes.com/displays/a20080605PD210.html

The company said Vizio's suppliers have licenses for the MPEG-2 patents, and Vizio believes that these licenses extend to Vizio's products.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

This is not as black & white as the Bloomberg article would have you believe.
Of course, Bloomberg is big business anyway.

The fine print : http://www.digitimes.com/displays/a20080605PD210.html

The company said Vizio's suppliers have licenses for the MPEG-2 patents, and Vizio believes that these licenses extend to Vizio's products.

The suppliers may have the liscenses, but those liscenses do not cover Vizio products in particular. This is an attempt to create a loophole that exempts Vizio from paying fees owed. If the liscenses cover manufacture of a particular piece(in this case a MPEG-2 decoder), it may not cover its implementation within the television itself. Since we do not know the particulars of the suit, its hard to say what covers what. But I know one thing, those big guys are not going to sue if they do not have a cause. And the fact that so many of them are joining in, means they have some cause, and a belief they will win.

Besides all of that, my corps is better than your corps! LOL

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Jim Noyd best hope not to land in jail...in China.

Yeah, he'll never get past the first dinner. They have these neat little chemical additives they like to season their food with. It a real killer!

[rroobbcc]

But I know one thing, those big guys are not going to sue if they do not have a cause.

Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.

I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

Rob

[mbbuchanan]

well all is not lost,maybe they can borrow back some of the endorsement money from LT to foot the legal bill.....: )

[GMichael]

Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.

I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

Rob

Welcome to AR,

So you think that all of these manufatureres decided to call each other and put this plan into action together?

[bobsticks]

Welcome to AR,

So you think that all of these manufatureres decided to call each other and put this plan into action together?

...or possibly just a conversation on the putting green.

[GMichael]

...or possibly just a conversation on the putting green.

What? They went without me again? Those SOB's!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think this lawsuit is based on the same one that was levied against Apex and Cyberhome for the same liscensing issues, and they won. That is why they are piling on this one. Apex's argument was their suppliers had paid THEIR liscensing fee's, so that covered Apex's butt. However the liscensing fee's were not designed to be transfereable, and Apex had to pay back liscensing fee's which drove them out of business. They apparently see this as the same infraction, and they are now coming down hard on Vizio.

I think this all stems from the fact that liscensing fee's were not policed well on DVD players, and the Chinese ran amok flooding the market with cheap DVD players they did not pay liscensing fee's on, which made the player alot cheaper, and eventually drove the major's out of the business.

[Rich-n-Texas]

VIZIO IS DEAD!

[GMichael]

VIZIO IS DEAD!

That's what they get for building nuclear powered TV's that will leak radioactive gasses and make the public grow 3 eyes.

[Rich-n-Texas]

And four tits!

[GMichael]

And four tits!

Four? One for each hand, one for the mouth, and one in the back for dancing?

[markw]

Roughly, what type of licensing fees could we be talking about on a per set basis?

Pennies, dollars, tens of dollars, more?

[pixelthis]

Sure they would. By suing they are creating FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) in the minds of potential Vizio buyers. These companies claims may be baseless, and they may in fact just be gambling that the FUD will cause potential Vizio customers to buy their products instead. These additional sales could likely pay for the lawsuit, and in the meantime they will have gained marketshare, and potentially even put a competitor out of business.

I am not saying that Vizio is blameless here, there is no way I could know. However, the decision to sue can have other motivations beyond simple justice.

Rob

I agree with you, and not sir talky, who as usual doesnt have a clue.
SUING is a matter of doing business, and vizio has caused some ill will.
ITS KINDA HARD to sell a 42in lcd set for two grand plus when a vizio can be had for a grand, sometimes with a better picture.
Whenever a manufacturer offers a decent product at a decent price, those who would want to trade on their "name", who think their product should cost two prices because
of the name on it rush to the attack.
NOT that I care, I have a nice set with DVDO scaling and a zero bright pixel guarentee,
and I love it, it looks great.
This sort of thing has been going on forever, using govt force to quell a competetor
when you cant compete.
PRETTY MUCH LIKE WHAT HAPPENED with Tucker motor,
or the way RCA tried to get FM radio outlawed when it first came out

[pixelthis]

VIZIO IS DEAD!

nope.
THAT SMELL is your fly by nite amp going KABOOM, oh, about six months
from now.
NOT TO MENTION the projection bulb in that rube goldberg set of yours, which, like the set its in, has the lifespan of a fruitfly
Oh, and PLASMA TOO OF COURSE

[pixelthis]

And four tits!

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH YOU?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I agree with you, and not sir talky, who as usual doesnt have a clue.
SUING is a matter of doing business, and vizio has caused some ill will.
ITS KINDA HARD to sell a 42in lcd set for two grand plus when a vizio can be had for a grand, sometimes with a better picture.
Whenever a manufacturer offers a decent product at a decent price, those who would want to trade on their "name", who think their product should cost two prices because
of the name on it rush to the attack.
NOT that I care, I have a nice set with DVDO scaling and a zero bright pixel guarentee,
and I love it, it looks great.
This sort of thing has been going on forever, using govt force to quell a competetor
when you cant compete.
PRETTY MUCH LIKE WHAT HAPPENED with Tucker motor,
or the way RCA tried to get FM radio outlawed when it first came out

If this was nothing more than big brother picking on little brother, then Apex and Cyberhome would still be here. This is a case of a company selling cheap underperforming televisions without the necessary liscenses, which by the way allow them to undercut the majors who pay their liscensing fees.

When it comes to PQ, Vizio is always at the bottom of the pile. Why, because vizio televsions lose 75% of their resolution when objects move. That is more loss than any CRT based televsion, and more than other brand of flat panels as well. They are at the top of list with flat panels with high light leakage(hence the low contrast ratio), and they cannot fully resolve 720p even with a DVDO(because the panel is the issue, not the processing). That is neither here nor there though, because the bottom line here is that it is clear they have not paid their liscensing fees, and using the same argument that Apex and Cyberhome used is not going to help them at all.

[thekid]

Well if Apex and Cyberhome lost on the same premise that explains the law suit in the first place. A widespread practice among large law firms is to bring what are called "cookie-cutter" lawsuits.

A law firm wins a large settlement in a complicated case. Other law firms take note and then look around for practical applications to sue another business using the winning argument/precedent set in the earlier case. It is cheaper for the law firm because much of the research has been done and their chance of winning is pretty high. The practice has become so common that some law firms have attempted to patent their winning arguements/cases so that they could continue to generate income.

My guess is that an outside law firm approached the plaintiffs and told them they could put together an relatively inexpensive lawsuit that could eliminate one of their competitors.

[pixelthis]

If this was nothing more than big brother picking on little brother, then Apex and Cyberhome would still be here. This is a case of a company selling cheap underperforming televisions without the necessary liscenses, which by the way allow them to undercut the majors who pay their liscensing fees.

When it comes to PQ, Vizio is always at the bottom of the pile. Why, because vizio televsions lose 75% of their resolution when objects move. That is more loss than any CRT based televsion, and more than other brand of flat panels as well. They are at the top of list with flat panels with high light leakage(hence the low contrast ratio), and they cannot fully resolve 720p even with a DVDO(because the panel is the issue, not the processing). That is neither here nor there though, because the bottom line here is that it is clear they have not paid their liscensing fees, and using the same argument that Apex and Cyberhome used is not going to help them at all.

INTERLACE pixtures(1080i, 489i) lose res when theres movement, like your antique dinosaurs that you like to watch.
Progressive doesnt have that problem.
The PQ on my set is quite good, you think they would sell so many if the picture sucked?
Its no bargain to get a cheap set and a bad picture.
YOU'RE just taking point for your masters at Sony, who, while they make good sets,
have a hard time justifying their premium prices just because their name is on the front.
So the lawsuit.
Truth is that inexpensive Vizios are depressing market prices, grredheads like your sony masters cant charge what they would like, and the cant compete.
HENCE the lawsuit.
Its got about as much to do with "picture quality" as your hobbled together crappola

[pixelthis]

AS for royalties they have been paid.
Former similar lawsuits were successfull for a reason, the plaintifs "laywered"
the defendants to death, paying out tons of money and finally outlasting them.
VIZIO, while a new name, is backed by older, more established companies.
They wont be such an easy victim to this nonsense.
Extrapolate the reasoning of the plaintiffs and you'd have to pay a royality
everytime you made a set, or WATCHED one.
But even if VIZIO sinks beneath the waves I dont care, I have a great set,
and it will certainly last till upgrade time (the two year mark).
I will bet its around long after your last CRT has fried and you cant find another , no matter how many dumpsters you "dive"