Mitsubishi (and the world) sue Vizio over MPEG-2 patents

It's no secret the rest of the display industry hasn't been happy with Vizio shaking up the low end with its cheap HDTVs, and now Mitsubishi and others have joined in a lawsuit accusing the manufacturer of refusing to license necessary patents. The 15 patents allegedly violated are for MPEG-2 compression that Mitsu, Sony, Samsung, Philips, Thomson, JVC and Columbia University of New York claim Vizio refuses to license. Vizio says it don't need no stinking licenses, since its suppliers already have them and it believes these licenses extend to its products. MPEG-LA also filed a similar suit against Target's TruTech house brand of televisions; while we'll have to wait for a ruling on the case to see who is right, it seems if they can't compete with these lower prices, other manufacturers will make sure cheap HDTVs cost more to make. For its part, Vizio says it does not believe this suit will have a materially adverse impact on its business, so for now, let the low-price flat screens roll.

Read - Mitsubishi, Samsung Sue Vizio Over Video Patents
Read - VIZIO Comments on MPEG-2 Lawsuit By Electronics Competitors

[4honor @ Jun 5th 2008 2:45PM]

It's sad that companies these days make money by suing others.

[Mike Cerm @ Jun 5th 2008 4:11PM]

The patent system is totally screwed up, and constant lawsuits are the result.

What I don't understand is why the hardware companies and the government bodies who regulate them get together and push for free, open standards. At some point, the FCC must have approved the ATSC-spec to become the broadcast standard. They should have demanded unencumbered formats.

Furthermore, why the hell does ATSC use MPEG2 anyway? I know that ATSC was agreed upon long before it's consumer adoption, but I think it's really sad that we're using '80s compression in the high-def broadcasts of today. ATSC will be with us for decades, and we're stuck with wasted bandwidth and looking at horrible compression-artifacts the whole time.

[qaplus @ Jun 5th 2008 2:47PM]

If the MPEG2 decoder chipmakers already license the patents, I don't see why Vizio needs to pay it again? Vizio is just the consumer of the chip. Otherwise they can as well sue every TV watcher not licensing these patents.

[friendlyner @ Jun 5th 2008 3:10PM]

Oh god don't give them any ideas. Suing customers is so in-vogue these days.

[andy @ Jun 5th 2008 3:58PM]

That's the same case that was just at the supreme court.

It's called exhuastion, and the question is:

Are the patent rights exhausted by the sale of the chip to a distributor if the distributor resells in the manner required by the manufacturer and the end user breaches with respect to the distributor and uses the chips in a way not allowed by the agreement between the distributor and the end user?

The problem is that the end user does not have the right to use the chips as they are, but they have no direct agreement with the manufacturer/patent owner. They're only breaching their agreement with the distributor, the distributor is doing exactly what's required by their distribution agreement with the manufacturer/patent owner, and the distributor isn't about to sue its own customer on behalf of someone else.



We don't know the answer to the question yet. The Supreme Court hasn't issued their decision in the previous case.

[Cash @ Jun 5th 2008 2:48PM]

I agree, why should they have to pay for a license twice? Sorry they are killing your profit margin guys, but thems the breaks.

[andy @ Jun 5th 2008 4:01PM]

The problem is that it's likely no one every paid to license each feature. The distributor of the chips is only buying the right to sell the chips with certain conditions. The distributor sells to the end user who never licenses anything as required by their contract with the distributor.

Now, can the patent owner/manufacturer sue? The distributor did what they agreed to do, but the end user didn't. So, did the patent rights exhaust with the sale to the distributor, or can the patent holder sue the end user? Neither has a license unless implied from the sale which probably expressly disclaims the license.

[Draaaainage! @ Jun 5th 2008 4:09PM]

I don't understand, let's say Asus makes an nVidia graphics card with some HD decoder on it that's been developed by nVidia, but has been licensed by Asus for resale. Now assume that Dell buys that board from Asus to put into it's desktop suystem; does Dell have to pay nVidia the right to sell that decoder with their machines? That's sounds ludicrous.

I liken it to this scenario; a car dealership having to pay Bose fees for selling a car with Bose speakers / stereo in it, even if the manufacturer already paid said fees. It just sounds ridiculous.

[andy @ Jun 5th 2008 6:02PM]

Draainage,


You're still making the assumption that the middleman who sold the chips to the end user fully licensed the chips from the manufacturer, when in practice, that has not traditionally been the case in the tech world.

Traditionally, you sell to a distributor with an agreement that your chips only be resold for use in a certain application. For example, an intel networking chip may only be used on intel processor based motherboards. The end user has traditionally abided by that restriction. Now what does the manufacturer do if that intel networking chip is used on an AMD based motherboard? They didn't license it for that, but the AMD motherboard manufacturer doesn't have any agreement directly with Intel not to it. They only promised the distributor that they wouldn't use the Intel chip on an AMD platform.

[waiownsyou @ Jun 5th 2008 2:57PM]

Let's boycott Mitsubishi products (including their crappy cars), Sony, Samsung, Philips, Thomson, JVC and never attend the Columbia University of New York.

[Hooterman @ Jun 5th 2008 2:59PM]

Boycott Mitsu, Sony and Samsung?

Thank you, but I think I'll pass.

I'll just keep boycotting Vizio like I have been, of course that's for different reasons.

[Tony @ Jun 5th 2008 3:00PM]

You first.

[DB @ Jun 5th 2008 3:10PM]

how bout you boycott the engadget comment section

[bohsocks @ Jun 5th 2008 3:12PM]

I'll boycott your face.... How about we all be amish and boycott all electronics?

PS: Boycotting doesn't work

[r3loaded @ Jun 5th 2008 3:20PM]

This boycott talk's really sexist, what about girlcotting them?

[bohsocks @ Jun 5th 2008 3:24PM]

Girls are icky....

...and I'm sure a foreign commodity to most Engadget readers

[Dave @ Jun 5th 2008 3:58PM]

Although hooterman got low ranked, I agree. Vizio is a low-end company that makes low end products. If I wanted to buy a low-end LCD I would just get an old/low-end samsung that has better performance (contrast ratio, etc) for almost the same price.

[kjb434 @ Jun 5th 2008 4:39PM]

So open up every electronic gadget you have that is not one of the brands you listed, you will definitely find one of those brands inside it.....

For example, sony and samsung make tons of LCD displays that are used in countless brands (even ones they compete against!).

[John @ Jun 5th 2008 3:23PM]

vizio, imo, is awesome. I can't imagine #$#cotting them boy or girl...

[bohsocks @ Jun 5th 2008 3:27PM]

I have a Vizio... and you get what you pay for... though that's more than you can say for most HDTVs on the market.... diminishing returns.... the marginally higher quality doesn't warrant paying twice as much in some instances....

Like I said... boycotting doesn't work... just ask those hippies who try to organize the "don't buy gas on this day" days..... no one does it... and even if they did... it doesn't work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's not even like people buy gas everyday...... maybe if they did something like coffee it'd have an impact..... So keep enjoying your Vizios, Gallants, PS3s, and mediocre flip-phones....

[Aaron Wanker @ Jun 5th 2008 3:30PM]

I agree that boycotting electronics won't work. But I do think that boycotting gas would work, just for a longer period of time than a day... how about 6 months? it'd suck, but in the long run if gas prices did drop, it'd be great!

[Firebird @ Jun 5th 2008 6:24PM]

Have fun getting mugged on the bus every day on your way home from work, wanker. No, really, thats his name!

[Hooterman @ Jun 5th 2008 3:49PM]

Plus you'd get to stay at home all day long because you couldn't get to work. Six month vacation FTW!!!

[vidiot @ Jun 5th 2008 3:35PM]

Interesting that Mitsubishi's got their knickers in a twist... wasn't too long ago that they flat-out refused to pay patent licenses on helical video recording (VHS). Apparently, they thought the inventor (Ampex) was too old and weak to pursue it. They were wrong, and got whacked for it.

[bohsocks @ Jun 5th 2008 3:41PM]

Boycotting gas would never work. Conservation could. It's what they did during the 1970s crisis.... people didn't stop buying gas. They couldn't (AND CAN'T). They kept their cars in the best shape they could to get the best gas mileage. And when it came time for a new car, they got the one with the best fuel economy.

Conservation could work -- stop wasting gas... carpool, bicycle, walk... boycotting would never work... and it stupid to try.

[Dave @ Jun 5th 2008 4:10PM]

Conservation doesn't work either, unless you think that the US has any pull in the price of oil anymore. Global demand for crude oil is so high right now because of developing countries that your idealistic concept of conservation is a joke. The only way oil is going to go down is when the electric car (or some other alternative energy) is enacted in automobiles on a large scale.

btw, the 1970s oil crisis was not ended by conservation, it was ended by non-OPEC countries continuously exporting to Western countries OPEC had embargoed, which resulted in OPEC losing a tremendous amount of market share.

[Teetdogs @ Jun 5th 2008 4:52PM]

I have to agree, I have a vizio and I am very happy with it, I also have a 50 inch samsung, personally I cant really see much of a difference in the two except for the menus and a few fine tweaks they both display HD content very very well.

[Timmy @ Jun 5th 2008 5:04PM]

Same here. No problems with my 47", 32", and 20" Vizio LCD sets. Love them all. Tell friends to buy them for HDTV sets. Also tell friends to buy Dell.

Still don't understand all the hate for Vizio and Dell.

[Haikibutsu @ Jun 5th 2008 7:18PM]

i has a vizio

[supersp33d @ Jun 5th 2008 8:17PM]

I'm very VERY pleased with my 47" 1080p Vizio I bought at Costco. Like the poster above, the only noticeable difference between the higher priced Samsung's/Sony's/Mitsu's etc were the onscreen menu's and a layer of high gloss coating on the LCD (the same annoying layer on new laptops). Heck, the LCD panel may have been made by Samsung or Philips!? The Price, Performance, AND warranty (2 years!!) were the reason I bought the Vizio... isn't Vizio

[DEEZNUTZ @ Jun 5th 2008 11:06PM]

All you folks who say that VIZIO is no different in PQ than SONY or SAMMY LCD's need an eye exam. Just on contrast alone the VIZIO gets blown away

Now I have a VIZIO myself, and I would say it's plenty good for most folks. But it doesn't hold a candle to my plasma.

[Gilbert King @ Jun 5th 2008 9:49PM]

Mitsubishi is the company that needs to be boycotted here. This lawsuit is as stupid as the Monster cable law Suit. I love my vizo lcd set. It isn't the best by any means but it is certainly best in its class. I'm boycotting Monster and Mitsubishi for being stupid!!! Competition is a great thing. It keeps everyone honest and forces them to innovate while the consumer benefits.

[Iridium @ Jun 5th 2008 9:55PM]

Westinghouse TVs and a few other off brands are far better than Vizio. All you have to do is go to Target and you can see how superior the Westinghouse sets are to Vizio for the same money or less.

[bohsocks @ Jun 5th 2008 10:51PM]

hahaha Westinghouse... funny joke....

Can you pour me a glass of that Best Buy koolaid you must be inhaling?

[iamsoinsane @ Jun 6th 2008 9:23AM]

Westingwho? isnt that like pulling out a 2 card in a game of war? when I used to sell tv's dont think I ever even tried to push a westinghouse..
*disclamer: westinghouse is a great tv if your legally blind or like paying a bit more for a tv that delivers less*

[Nathan Dbb @ Jun 6th 2008 7:35PM]

Intellectual property has gone crazy since the mid-90's. We need to reduce IP protection for the benefit of consumers and small and competitive businesses.