Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 6th May 2010 13:52 UTC, submitted by Jupiter
Legal While Eugenia has already detailed just how intricate and impressive the MPEG-LA's efforts have been to basically set up the foundations that would allow them to sue just about everyone - their vague and unclear licenses are used in everything from DVD players to digital camcorders, and as such, it's hard to avoid them. Many others claim that the MPEG-LA won't ever go rogue (or this, take your pick). I think those people will be interested to know that one of the MPEG-LA's subsidiaries, a cut-and-clear patent troll, has launched several patent infringement suits earlier this year. This patent troll's CEO? Larry Horn - yes, the same Larry Horn who's also CEO of the MPEG-LA.
Order by: Score:
Both!
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 6th May 2010 13:54 UTC
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Many others claim that the MPEG-LA won't ever go rogue (or this, take your pick).


Before we get going: both. At the same time. Don't care where. Yum

Sorry. Carry on. Just some lightheartedness for today's smile.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Both!
by Lazarus on Thu 6th May 2010 15:42 UTC in reply to "Both!"
Lazarus Member since:
2005-08-10

You know Thom, for making our eyes bleed from exposure to a Palin picture, you're going to The Special Hell.

The one reserved for child molesters and people who talk in theatres.

Reply Score: 4

This is obscene
by woegjiub on Thu 6th May 2010 14:15 UTC
woegjiub
Member since:
2008-11-25

I hope that people can now see that MPEG-LA is pure evil.

Existing to 'license' things to people.... Sounds an awful lot like existing to charge people money for doing things they patented.

This kind of patent-trolling and blatant abuse of the system which was meant to improve innovation needs to stop.

I hope very strongly that google open-source VP8, that MPEG-LA sue them over some broad, all-enveloping patent, and that software patents are rendered null and void by a combination of that and Apple vs HTC.

Reply Score: 4

v RE: This is obscene
by koffie on Thu 6th May 2010 16:24 UTC in reply to "This is obscene"
RE[2]: This is obscene
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 6th May 2010 16:30 UTC in reply to "RE: This is obscene"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Right. The company is owned by the MPEG-LA, and headed by the SAME CEO as the MPEG-LA.

But that's all coincidental, right?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: This is obscene
by boldingd on Thu 6th May 2010 16:50 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: This is obscene"
boldingd Member since:
2009-02-19

I bet you're also one of those irredeemable fools who believes that smoke and fire are related.

God dammit Thom, what is your problem?

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: This is obscene
by Karitku on Thu 6th May 2010 17:18 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: This is obscene"
Karitku Member since:
2006-01-12

It was so real,
Like I woke up in Wonderland.
All sorta terrifying
I don't wanna be all alone
While I tell this story.
And can anyone tell me why
Y'all sound like Peanuts parents?
Will I ever be coming down?
This is so real
Finally, it's my lucky day
See, my heart is racing
'Cause this shit never happens to me
-Tool, Rosetta Stoned


This is how I feel nowdays visiting OSNews, it's like Area 51 with Coffee shop. Excuse while I put diapers and fix my tin foil hat.

Reply Score: 2

What does the last line mean?
by MissTJones on Thu 6th May 2010 14:28 UTC
MissTJones
Member since:
2010-03-25

What does the last line's crack about Flash video mean?

Flash video is mostly moving towards H.264, and anything that uses that codec via Flash faces the exact same issues.

To be precise Adobe are paying these guys already to distribute Flash, and if in 5 years they charge for web streaming it will apply regardless of if the video is watched via Flash or native in HTML5.

We've only been discussing this to death, you'd think we'd have mastered these subtle technical distinctions by now.

Plus, we shouldn't be annoying Adobe on this particular issue. By getting them to adopt VP8 (or if desperate using the already deployed VP6) they have the ability to decide this codec shenanigans in favour of royalty-free codecs if they want to. We'll need to serve something to the poor souls running IE6-8 and I'd rather not have multiple files if it's not necessary.

Reply Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

What does the last line's crack about Flash video mean?


I meant it like this: you'd almost long for the days before this HTML5 video discussion.

Reply Score: 3

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

"serve something to the poor souls running IE6-8"

Why, not providing easy Youporn viewing will motivate them to upgrade to IE9.. MS has less IE6~8 to support and they push users forward to the current IE version (well, users that don't move to a better and more open browser).

Reply Score: 3

RE: What does the last line mean?
by Radio on Thu 6th May 2010 18:09 UTC in reply to "What does the last line mean?"
Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

With flash, you can use whatever codec is installed on the computer. That's an advantage over HTML5 (but that's not comparable: one is a third-party application, the other's a standard).

Reply Score: 1

Pfft!
by Drunkula on Thu 6th May 2010 15:22 UTC
Drunkula
Member since:
2009-09-03

Speed dial has been around for ages. Surely there must be prior-art there (unless they did something novel to it).

Reply Score: 2

RE: Pfft!
by DrillSgt on Thu 6th May 2010 15:26 UTC in reply to "Pfft!"
DrillSgt Member since:
2005-12-02

Speed dial has been around for ages. Surely there must be prior-art there (unless they did something novel to it).


Most definitely. It was around before cell phones. I agree, there has to be prior art.

Reply Score: 3

Madness.
by Wiseguy on Thu 6th May 2010 16:08 UTC
Wiseguy
Member since:
2010-01-01

Where does the madness end.... I am speechless.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Madness. - the vote
by jabbotts on Thu 6th May 2010 16:20 UTC in reply to "Madness."
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

As someone put very well the other day; what can one expect when they keep voting lawyers into political offices. (can't remember the exact wording)

Reply Score: 3

v The logic in this article...
by koffie on Thu 6th May 2010 16:20 UTC
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

. Nobody ever said these patents MobileMedia Idea's now sues for were ever in a pool managed by the MPEG-LA.


What are you on about? Nobody - certainly not this article - is suggesting anything like that.

I think you really need to actually READ the article. It seems like to me you didn't read AT ALL.

Reply Score: 3

I don't understand the complaint
by whartung on Thu 6th May 2010 16:43 UTC
whartung
Member since:
2005-07-06

Either the patents are valid or they are not. Isn't this what people want? Basically, the primary concern now with patents in general, and MPEG-LA, is that their patent holding are FUD, that they hold their claims and threats over folks heads and through muddled statements.

Rather than saying "You may be in violation, and will need to license this", they're finally pulling the trigger and trying to enforce the patents. Which means they need to, in court, qualify and clarify their patent claims.

Once that's done, other can more readily (potentially) work around their patents and achieve the same functionality.

I would expect that the patent-free codec folks would embrace a lawsuit, as that seems like the only way they can get traction as a safe alternative by surviving the process instead of living under a cloud of threats, FUD, "I say, He says".

At least they're going after folks who's legal departments are mere blips on their balance sheets compared to Joe the Hacker who would need to mortgage their life.

Reply Score: 3

h264 is doubleplusgood!
by Radio on Thu 6th May 2010 17:49 UTC
Radio
Member since:
2009-06-20

"Hi! I'm Larry Horn.

As said in this article, at MPEG-LA, we've always gone after anybody in need of a license, to offer them one, because we're nice like that.

Also, h264 is open, whereas Theora isn't free. It would be better for you to "goodthink different", like John Gruber does.

Also note that all iPhone apps will soon have to be coded in objective-newspeak, a new language which won't compile if your app contains porn or political cartoons (and some other undiscosed reasons - just remember: if it doesn't compile, it is crimecode).

Finally, by the end of 2016, MPEG-LA will rename itself the ministry of love-LA. We are currently training our agents on the model of the ones who investigated the stolen iPhone case."

Edited 2010-05-06 18:05 UTC

Reply Score: 6

Comment by koki
by koki on Thu 6th May 2010 18:52 UTC
koki
Member since:
2005-10-17

The MPEG-LA is shackling the web (and beyond) to H264 and its patents, so that it will be able to collect royalties until the end of time, and sue anyone who dares to step out of line. Their behaviour is harming innovation, and a direct threat to the freedom of the web. MobileMedia Ideas' patent troll behaviour is only a taste of what's to come if we allow H264 to ruin the web even further.


Thom, you are starting to sound like Stallman.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by koki
by David on Thu 6th May 2010 19:22 UTC in reply to "Comment by koki"
David Member since:
1997-10-01

Re: Stallman: even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by koki
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 6th May 2010 19:23 UTC in reply to "Comment by koki"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Well, I restrict my freedom nonsense to the web, where it belongs. I strongly believe that the web should be accessible by anyone, with whatever device they choose, no matter how wealthy they are.

If that makes me sound like Stallman, then so be it. I'd rather be associated with a free and open web than with Apple and Microsoft anyway.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by koki
by Radio on Thu 6th May 2010 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by koki"
Radio Member since:
2009-06-20

http://benward.me/blog/understand-the-web

Even Gruber linked to it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Comment by koki
by koki on Fri 7th May 2010 00:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by koki"
koki Member since:
2005-10-17

At least you acknowledge that it is nonsense.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Comment by koki
by darknexus on Thu 6th May 2010 21:07 UTC in reply to "Comment by koki"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Thing about Stallman, I used to think he was crazy. Of late though, seeing the crap these big patent trolls and corporate types keep pulling, I'm wondering if maybe he's not quite as crazy as I thought.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by koki
by ShadesFox on Fri 7th May 2010 00:04 UTC in reply to "Comment by koki"
ShadesFox Member since:
2006-10-01

You can think Stallman crazy all you want, but when I look at who is on the other side of Stallman... I think I would rather stand with him.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by koki
by koki on Fri 7th May 2010 00:13 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by koki"
koki Member since:
2005-10-17

You can think Stallman crazy all you want...


I did not say Stallman was crazy. I wanted to point out how the last paragraph from Thom resembled a bit Stallman's radical discourse.

I do know that Thom is not a radical, though; in fact, he seems to be a rather practical person, who uses Windows 7 to watch his favorite Hollywood shows.

Reply Score: 1

Time for an anti-trust lawsuit
by obsidian on Fri 7th May 2010 00:20 UTC
obsidian
Member since:
2007-05-12

I want to see the DoJ take on MPEG-LA and blast them until there's nothing left but a smoking hole in the ground.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Time for an anti-trust lawsuit
by bnolsen on Fri 7th May 2010 15:51 UTC in reply to "Time for an anti-trust lawsuit"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

Unless the DOJ finds a way to also get payola. Patent holding companies seem to have a way to attract lots of lobbyists.

Reply Score: 3

that's it
by mikesum32 on Fri 7th May 2010 06:53 UTC
mikesum32
Member since:
2005-10-22

I'm getting rid of me Buggles cds. Trevor Horn can't mess with me and get away with it ;-)

Reply Score: 2

RE: that's it
by Kroc on Fri 7th May 2010 06:56 UTC in reply to "that's it"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Internet killed the video star…

Reply Score: 2

Comment by kaiwai
by kaiwai on Fri 7th May 2010 07:20 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

The one thing I'd love to see is something along the lines of a law passed that if a technology becomes so critical to the economy that a small group can hold hostage millions due to patents - that the law would allow some sort of organisation to grab the patents and allow royalty free implementation of that given technology. That is about the only way one can see a balanced approach to software development, especially when one considers that h264 isn't just a CODEC, it is a major piece of technology that permeates ever part of a persons life; from online movies to cam corders, to applications, digital television, digital music and so on. Something with such a large grip on the economy can be allowed to hold the whole economy to ransom because a noble intention has been screwed beyond belief into the current situation with patents.

Reply Score: 3

How to treat patents
by Neolander on Fri 7th May 2010 10:10 UTC
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

-A patents is owned by all individuals who participated to its creation
-They can't transfer its property
-Once all of them have died, the patent is released in public domain and its ideas cannot be patented anymore

Problem solved. Why didn't we do this right the first time ?

Edited 2010-05-07 10:21 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: How to treat patents
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 7th May 2010 10:13 UTC in reply to "How to treat patents"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Problem solved. Why didn't we did this right the first time ?


Oh we did, just like copyright. It's just that once money gets involved, governments get involved. While either money or government involvement is no problem, both at the same time is an explosive mix.

Kind of like Martini and Amaretto, really.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: How to treat patents
by Janvl on Fri 7th May 2010 14:59 UTC in reply to "RE: How to treat patents"
Janvl Member since:
2007-02-20

When you mix politics and money you get corruption.
Just look at the lobbyists, financial markets etc.

Greece is only the start, we haven't learned anything from the past 400 years, but that is "off topic".

Although, . . . why not kill patent trolls, they are evil and nonhuman! Probably aliens trying to disturb our world. Let do it the french way, chop of some heads.

Reply Score: 2

Patent troll?
by aliquis on Sat 8th May 2010 23:39 UTC
aliquis
Member since:
2005-07-23

I thought a patent troll was someone who patented a lot of "ideas" without ever developing them into a product just to sue others.

The MPEG people got a product, and ideas/implementations which may or may not be worth protecting.

Reply Score: 2