Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Apr 2010 21:40 UTC, submitted by Helge
Legal Well, this certainly explains a whole lot. Both Apple and Microsoft have stated that the legality of Theora is highly debatable, and as it turns out, they knew more than we do - most likely courtesy of their close involvement with the MPEG-LA. Responding to an email from Free Software Foundation Europe activist Hugo Roy, Steve Jobs has stated that a patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora. Update: Monty Montgomery of Xiph (Ogg and Theora's parent organisation) has responded on Slashdot: "If Jobs's email is genuine, this is a powerful public gaffe ('All video codecs are covered by patents'). He'd be confirming MPEG's assertion in plain language anyone can understand. It would only strengthen the pushback against software patents and add to Apple's increasing PR mess. Macbooks and iPads may be pretty sweet, but creative individuals don't really like to give their business to jackbooted thugs."
Thread beginning with comment 421969
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Copied
by iwod on Sat 1st May 2010 09:15 UTC
iwod
Member since:
2006-05-02

This is great. After all, under the current system, Theora is bound to get sued anyway. So why use something that will cause problems.

Yes, i know we all want, everything to be free. But we live in Real World, not some fantasy world. To use Theora, supporters should think get rid of Patents system and not about condemning H.264 patents holder . Afterall they spend A LOT of money into R&D. And those people who work hard on R&D in Uni, or Labs, need to feed themself or their Family.

So Yes, unless you didn't realize, they are human afterall, and they also need money.

And as to Licensing Fees? - That is called return of Investment - If you dont like this idea you should really touch stocks either.

P.S - Of coz, getting rid of Patents would also be a Win for H.264, since it offer much better quality anyway.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Copied
by Beta on Sat 1st May 2010 09:44 in reply to "Copied"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, i know we all want, everything to be free. But we live in Real World, not some fantasy world. To use Theora, supporters should think get rid of Patents system and not about condemning H.264 patents holder . Afterall they spend A LOT of money into R&D. And those people who work hard on R&D in Uni, or Labs, need to feed themself or their Family.


You really think the R&D money members of the MPEG-LA spent to develop their codecs had any bearing on another independent invention?

The assumption nowadays is that if you’ve made anything, and someone else owns the monopoly for it (thats what a patent is), that you’ve some-how copied their direct work.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Copied
by Soulbender on Sat 1st May 2010 10:20 in reply to "Copied"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

So are you saying the people who created Theora did not spend time and effort on it and don't need to feed their families?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Copied
by lemur2 on Sat 1st May 2010 14:50 in reply to "Copied"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Yes, i know we all want, everything to be free. But we live in Real World, not some fantasy world. To use Theora, supporters should think get rid of Patents system and not about condemning H.264 patents holder . Afterall they spend A LOT of money into R&D. And those people who work hard on R&D in Uni, or Labs, need to feed themself or their Family.


Pffft.

H264 is the standard used in Blueray players and also in digital TV transmission. R&D effort spent in developing H264 has been recouped years ago.

Royalties being gathered now are pure cream.

This is not about feeding anybodies families, this is pure unadulterated corporate greed and rip-off.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Copied
by howitzer86 on Wed 5th May 2010 11:21 in reply to "Copied"
howitzer86 Member since:
2008-02-27

I've thought about that. In the real world people get paid for the work they do. Chances are, the programmers behind the product have already been paid. Unless they work for themselves, programmers rarely receive royalties for their work - so who are you paying when you pay for the right to use patented software? The executives of course - Representatives of The Company.

In the case of commercial software such as Final Cut, you've already paid for the license, why should one also pay MPEG-LA for the right to use part of software they've already paid for?! Maybe this trickles down by guranteeing an income for The Company(s) behind this format, but the reality is Apple, Microsoft, and even Google don't have a problem filling their coffers with their services and software licenses.

After realizing that the patent money goes past the programmers and into the pockets of bean counters, I decided not to care about patents.

Should I somehow infringe on one and get sued, I decided it would probably be unjust and I would be very loud about it - with or without a gag order. If I ran a company, I would simply make sure we had good lawyers on hand and a significant amount of money specifically for fighting in court.

But in the mean time, I wouldn't be worried about patents, because lately it seems as though no matter who you are, or what you do, you're going to infringe on someones intellectual property. Everyone can be sued over everything these days. Either you can worry about it and give yourself an aneurysm, or you can be defiant, prepare for it, and do what you want to do. (I do believe copyright should be respected though).

Reply Parent Score: 1