Difference between revisions of "Audio-video patents"
(Is''' ''all'' '''video development blocked?) |
(→External links: first half of re-organise) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
| − | * [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/07/patent_crackdown_at_cebit/ 180 German police perform raid regarding software patents] | + | * [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/07/patent_crackdown_at_cebit/ 180 German police perform raid regarding software patents], 7 Mar 2008, '''The Reg''' |
| − | + | * [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-audio-format-matters.html gnu.org: Why audio format matters], '''gnu.org''' | |
| − | * [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-audio-format-matters.html gnu.org: Why audio format matters] | + | * [http://shaver.off.net/diary/2010/01/23/html5-video-and-codecs/ HTML5 video and codecs], and [http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2010/01/video_freedom_a.html Video, Freedom And Mozilla], Jan 2010, '''Mozilla Foundation''' |
| + | * [http://openvideoalliance.org/2010/03/lets-get-video-on-wikipedia/ Let’s Get Video on Wikipedia!] - campaign launched by [[Open Video Alliance]] | ||
* [http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/Rob_Savoye,_Gnash_-_Gnash,_the_GNU_Flash_Player_-_LibrePlanet_2009.ogg Rob Savoye, at the end of a Gnash talk, mentions a CodecPatents project] (the project has a [http://www.codecpatents.org/ placeholder website]) | * [http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/Rob_Savoye,_Gnash_-_Gnash,_the_GNU_Flash_Player_-_LibrePlanet_2009.ogg Rob Savoye, at the end of a Gnash talk, mentions a CodecPatents project] (the project has a [http://www.codecpatents.org/ placeholder website]) | ||
| − | |||
* One of the relevant patents: [http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,214,678.PN.&OS=PN/5,214,678&RS=PN/5,214,678 US5,214,678] (relevant to what??) | * One of the relevant patents: [http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=5,214,678.PN.&OS=PN/5,214,678&RS=PN/5,214,678 US5,214,678] (relevant to what??) | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
===Difficulty of developing players=== | ===Difficulty of developing players=== | ||
| Line 49: | Line 47: | ||
* Videolan: [http://www.videolan.org/press/patents.html VideoLAN is seriously threatened by software patents...] | * Videolan: [http://www.videolan.org/press/patents.html VideoLAN is seriously threatened by software patents...] | ||
* [https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionFFmpeg Ubuntu forum discussion about whether and how ffmpeg can be distributed] | * [https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MainInclusionFFmpeg Ubuntu forum discussion about whether and how ffmpeg can be distributed] | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Wikipedia articles=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3#Licensing_and_patent_issues MP3#Licensing and patent issues] | ||
| + | * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264 Wikipedia: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC] | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 16:08, 31 August 2010
Audio-video is a domain of computer science plagued by thickets of software patents.
Contents
Is all video development blocked?
When explaining why Google were not supporting the patent-free Ogg Theora codec, Chris DiBona replied "here's the challenge: Can theora move forward without infringing on the other video compression patents?"[1]
Patent licensing group MPEG LA have made vague, unsubstantiated claims about that all video formats infringe their patents:
no one in the market should be under the misimpression that other codecs such as Theora are patent-free. Virtually all codecs are based on patented technology, and many of the essential patents may be the same as those that are essential to AVC/H.264. Therefore, users should be aware that a license and payment of applicable royalties is likely required to use these technologies developed by others, too. MPEG LA would consider offering on additional licenses that would make these rights conveniently available to the market under a single license as an alternative to negotiating separate licenses with individual patent holders.[2]
Making innovation commercially disadvantageous
Nokia's 2007 position paper regarding video codecs in the w3c's HTML5 standard suggested using software from 20 years ago:
A second alternative would be the reference, as a baseline, of older media compression standards, of which one can be reasonably sure that related patents are expired (or are close to expiration). One example for these codecs is ITU-T Rec. H.261, which (in its first version) was ratified in November 1988. While not competitive with today’s state of the art codecs, it’s in the author’s personal experience not that far in its performance from [...] The disadvantage of this approach is clearly the use of technologies that are two decades old, but that may be at least partly offset by the commercial advantage.[3]
(emphasis added)
So, due to software patents, Nokia sees a commercial advantage in using technology from 20 years ago.
Related pages on ESP Wiki
- MPEG video formats - including H.264
- Harm to standards
- Example software patents
- Real Media - audio and video formats with patent problems[4]
- Ogg Theora
- On2 VP8
- List of recordings and transcripts
- Why consumer organisations should be involved
External links
- 180 German police perform raid regarding software patents, 7 Mar 2008, The Reg
- gnu.org: Why audio format matters, gnu.org
- HTML5 video and codecs, and Video, Freedom And Mozilla, Jan 2010, Mozilla Foundation
- Let’s Get Video on Wikipedia! - campaign launched by Open Video Alliance
- Rob Savoye, at the end of a Gnash talk, mentions a CodecPatents project (the project has a placeholder website)
- One of the relevant patents: US5,214,678 (relevant to what??)
Difficulty of developing players
- Does FFmpeg infringe patents? We don't know
- Videolan: VideoLAN is seriously threatened by software patents...
- Ubuntu forum discussion about whether and how ffmpeg can be distributed
