Comments on: Supremes Won’t Hear Cablevision Case, Hello Remote DVRs! http://gigaom.com/video/supremes-wont-hear-cablevision-case-hello-remote-dvrs/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:01:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Hey Comcast, Skip Content and Spend Money on These Things http://gigaom.com/video/supremes-wont-hear-cablevision-case-hello-remote-dvrs/#comment-473557 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:05:21 +0000 http://newteevee.com/?p=27405#comment-473557 [...] silver box out of your house and move the DVR to your home office. We realize Cablevision’s legal victory doesn’t mean the technology is totally out of the woods yet, but be bold — push the [...]

]]> By: Liz Gannes http://gigaom.com/video/supremes-wont-hear-cablevision-case-hello-remote-dvrs/#comment-473556 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 15:16:13 +0000 http://newteevee.com/?p=27405#comment-473556 Thanks Andy.

]]> By: Andy H http://gigaom.com/video/supremes-wont-hear-cablevision-case-hello-remote-dvrs/#comment-473555 Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:32:52 +0000 http://newteevee.com/?p=27405#comment-473555 There is a distinction between remote storage DVR and network DVR.

In RS-DVR, each subscriber gets a dedicated amount of server side storage and a programme that is recorded by multiple users is recorded multiple times in each user’s space. n-DVR optimises the storage by only storing a single copy of each recorded programme, and maintains references and counts to tie it to each user’s own recording list.

I believe the Cablevision case relates exclusively to RS-DVR and that n-DVR is not tested in court yet. RS-DVR was perhaps seen as easier to get approval for in that it effectively takes a hard drive out of the STB and into the network.

Depending on the dynamics of the service, the storage and storage management requirements could be quite significantly higher for RS-DVR. It requires a video operator to become more of a hosted storage provider than n-DVR does.

]]>