Kevin Werbach on Tivo

Kevin Werbach, assistant professor of legal studies at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, and organizer of the popular Supernova conference, writes Tivo's obit.

OK, I have to admit it. Tivo's goose is cooked. I've been a Tivo user for years, and like most Tivo owners, I absolutely love the product. I've been convinced since I first plugged it in that some day, all TV would work like this. And I'm still convinced of that. Television as a fixed schedule grid determined by networks and cable operators is doomed. User control is the future of TV.
...
Tivo, though, still has two big assets. I'm reasonably confident those assets will be valuable enough for one of the major industry players to purchase, or perhaps a consortium. The assets are Tivo's brand, and its patents.

What do you think will happen to Tivo?  Who might benefit most from Tivo's patents or brand?  Or is there another important asset of Tivo that Werbach missed?

Werblog: Who will buy Tivo for scrap?

Comments

[New York]

Kevin's comments with respect to TiVo's IP were rather flippant:

"Perhaps even more significant, though, is Tivo's intellectual property. I don't know exactly what patents Tivo holds, but it has a significant portfolio of assets, because it has been in the game so long and innovated in so many areas. Big interests that want to compete in the video space -- and that, today, means some very big interests -- won't want to be on the other side of those patents."

If TiVo does indeed have a broad patent portfolio that is actually defensible (the EchoStar lawsuit is incredibly important), then how exactly is it "toast". And if the patents can be enforced, then why exactly would it need to sell itself? How does its patent portfolio not preclude its competitors from replicating its technology? And then why does it not effectively own the entire PVR market similar to Qualcomm in CDMA? If the patents are defensible, then TiVo is in the most enviable position in the entire industry and the increased adoption rates are only serving to guarantee a long and prosperous future.

[Nat]

I think I saw this movie before, when it was starring an iconoclastic little computer company. I wonder whatever happened to them. Oh, their stock just a split-adjusted all-time high. I see.

[MB]

Actually if Tivo were more successful it would just increase the likelihood it would be bought.

as a TIVO fan being bought is probabaly the best solutionto hope for at this point.

one just hopes the buyer would maintain the product with the zeal TIVO has

[New York]

There is no incentive to sell if you own the key IP rights to a technology.

My big caveat here is that I have zero clue with respect to the validity of TiVos patent portfolio - Im simply extending Kevin's argument.

[Frank]

I agree that TiVo as it is, is doomed. With that said, I don't think that they are going to continue down the DVR path.

It would make more sense for them to become a TV provider: IPTV to be exact. Given their new partnership with NetFlix, and their loyal subscriber base, they could easily roll out IPTV to TiVo and remove the cable/satellite provider as the middle man.

Frank
http://openjar.blogspot.com

[Bryan]

Yea Frank - rolling out IPTV can be done "easily." ;-)

[Jason]

If TiVo is in fact going to be bought to stay afloat I for one would love to see them rekindle talks with Comcast. Of course being a Comcast subscriber I'm hoping the monthly fees would be reduced running the DVR through Comcast.

The two companies were taking before, and now that the CEO has stepped down his replacement should look down that path again. What better way to keep the popular & favored TiVo software running than to get paired up with one of (if not the) largest cable providers in the States. Sure satellite subscribers might take a hit on that, but DirecTV has already said they don't need TiVo so why should TiVo care about them. The lost satellite subscribers could easily be regained via cable subscribers in Comcast's network.