Slashdot Mirror
DivX ;-) Deux Update
Epitaph writes "The author of the DivX ;-) codec (a high-quality MPEG4 codec used quite heavily by DVD pirates to recompress movies) has recently released more information about his next-generation codec: DivX ;-) Deux, or Project Mayo. MPEG4 is the future standard for internet video, and since DivX ;-) Deux is going to be free, this is a very interesting project to keep an eye on. There's now an 'Ask Gej' section where you can ask the author questions, or suggest new features for the future codec. He's also looking for coders, so help the guy out!"
People who put punctuation in their product names ("DivX ;-)", ":CueCat:", "!nnovation") should be shot.
--
Non-meta-modded "Overrated" mods are killing Slashdot
(Hey Ryan! Here's your proof!)
It's definitely hacked. The rationale for DivX is that ever since AVIs have been disabled to use MS-MPEG4, DivX unlocks that hack (among other things), and renames it to a different FOURCC code, so the divx dll won't conflict with your Media Player codecs. That way, Microsoft can stealthy update your codecs all they want, but divx codecs will not be overwritten.
Of course the problem here is that you need to install the DivX codec in order to watch DivX, and that new tweaks in the MS-MPEG4 doens't get rolled in automatically (DivX updates are usually newer hacked versions of MS-MPEG4 codecs).
A CODEC is just a tool.
So what if it can be used to illegally distribute video?
I can just as easily use it to compress and distribute content *I* created.
If I smack a trick with my crowbar because he beat up
one of my ho's, did the crowbar manufacturer assualt the trick? No. I did.
Likewise, if Bobby W4r3z D00d rips his parent's DVDs,
and uses DivX to encode them, did the DivX people violate copyright? No. Bobby did.
--K
I better get an extra karma point for the pimp analogy.
---
It's definitely hacked. The rationale for DivX is that ever since AVIs have been disabled to use MS-MPEG4, DivX unlocks that hack (among other things), and renames it to a different FOURCC code, so the divx dll won't conflict with your Media Player codecs. That way, Microsoft can stealthy update your codecs all they want, but divx codecs will not be overwritten.
for those wondering what the FOURCC thing is It's "A Four-Character Code used to identify Resource Interchange File Format (RIFF) chunks. A FOURCC is a 32-bit quantity represented as a sequence of one to four ASCII alphanumeric characters, padded on the right with blank characters. RIFF (Resource Interchange File Format) is a specification used to define standard formats for multimedia files and to prevent compatibility problems that often occur when file-format definitions change over time. Because each piece of data in the file is identified by a standard header, an application that does not recognize a given data element can skip over the unknown information."
From MSDN. Bassicly multimedia formats are typically "layered" files, the RIFF format has each sublayer identified with a FOURCC, all this mean is that each sub part of the the file has a label that uses four charaters.. in the case of WAV it's actually WAV(space) or for your C guys,
char *four_cc = {'W', 'A', 'V', ' '};
Actually these days MS wants you to use a GUID for identifing the approiote codec (spelling.. bla!!). anyway, just a technical rant. In the past i've had to deal with AVI's. AVI's are just like video versions of WAV's. as in that they are codec independant media formats. WAV's are PCM RIFF files, they start with WAVE, but can tell the client what codec to use, thats why you've seen MP3 files with
I'm not sure but I think the only reason MS uses extensions like
The funny thing is that the old sk00l
btw: I'm a contracter at Microsoft Research, here we have something called a "Vitrual Kichen" it's a big 4 way live video confernce projected on the wall next to all the free pop. I spoke to the fellow who developed it, I was asking him about using ACM (Audio Compression Manager SDK) for MPEG compression, he told me that ya, it's a bitch, and that to "really" use it you need some magic (licence) key. he mailed me later with some code for a class that makes it easyer to work with, and the key... maybe I shouldn't have told yall that... oh well.
I better stop before i get modded down to OT..
late,
-Jon
this is my sig.
I don't want to come off as chicken little here, but....
Be sure of one thing: the MPAA is in bed with Congress and the Federal Government on the issue of preserving a near monopoly on the dissemination of copyrighted works in this country (US). Anyone who visibly participates in a movement or project that threatens this plutocratic dominance will be under severe scrutiny at all levels. Martin Luther King Jr, Albert Einstein, and John Lennon had entire reams of paper in their FBI files. What makes you think Linus Torvalds doesn't? And what makes you think that if you're the next Linus Torvalds, that you won't either?
Be very careful when pissing off people with power. The modern State exists for the purpose of inflicting deliberate pain upon a select minority whose very existence runs contrary to the governing principles of the majority. Are you willing to be that martyr?
The rough purpose of the fair use law is to limit the copyright privileges to having a monopoly and control of the commercial exploitation of the work. Congress didn't want to take away our right to make copies of music and video; they only chose to restrict our selling or other commercial exploitation of the works.
This kind of massive file sharing that napster makes possible, and hopefully this codec and faster connections will make possible with video, is actually legal as long as you don't receive any compensation.
You don't have to trust me on this. If you are smart enough to read slashdot, then you are smart enough to go here and download Title 17 of the US code and read it for yourself. It's kind of thick. I printed my copy out and left it in the bathroom, and read a few pages everytime I took a shit. I read it carefully and marked all over it the interesting parts, but I never found where it said that non-commercial uncompensated duplication and distribution of music or video was illegal.
You see, Congress wanted to make very sure that copyright was not an ability to control how people used things. They didn't want the copyright holders to be able to sell one copy for listening in the car and another copy for listening in the house and special copy for listening on weekends. (Which is exactly what the MPAA, the RIAA, and other big copyright holders dream of.) If Congress had wanted to do that, they could have written it into the law; where is it ?
Of course, this same principle of non-money-making copies being normal use of the medium you purchased also extends to software. Holy Shit! you say. Can I make a copy of that windows NT disk at work and install it on my machine at home ? As long as you are not using that machine to do consulting, work from home, or anything beyound home "hobbiest" type use, yes. (I'd advise against it. There are much better hobbiest OSs.)
But the big copyright holders of programs had a massively successful campaign to convince the average slashbot that this was illegal. Remember all those ads in magazines and posters in school computer clusters in the '80s ? They managed to shame huge numbers of people into buying things they didn't need to. The 700 club, usenet get rich yesterday schemes, Scientology, Albanian pyramid schemes, the Russian bailout . . . it all pales in compairison to the anti-piracy campaign.
The RIAA and MPAA are going for a repeat move on their copyright material. Ironically, inspite of the Jon Katzian "the world will change because small people have a voice on slashdot" theory, all you automatons just help them out by parroting Hollywood's false legal propaganda.
It just goes to show that you can give everybody a voice on the internet, and they'll still just repeat what they hear in TV commercials.
The reason why DivX got so popular is that it was the right thing at the right time. There was no technical wizardry involved, relative to projects such as LAME or Ogg Vorbis. I doubt Maxmorice or Gej can even explain the whole MPEG4 spec.
It's almost akin to someone telling you that they hacked a Palm V to have 8mb instead of 2mb, and now they have decided to make their own PDA. Hmm?
My question is - given that "An early version of DivX ;-) Deux is complete," did they hack another MS-MPEG4 codec, or are they coding something from scratch? It's been only a short time period since they announced the project, so I hope it's not just another hack (which brings to another question - how can they expect investors to put money in a company that illegally binary hacks some other companies' software?)
Before you moderate this down as a troll post, please read it.
a high-quality MPEG4 codec used quite heavily by DVD pirates to recompress movies
Nice to see the truth come out. Tom's Hardware even knows this.
This is why the MPAA won the first round. This is what DeCSS.exe (Yes, the Win32 program, not the LiViD player) is being used for. It is certainly possible to transfer enough of a DVD to a 650 MB CD-ROM using this technology.
Yes I know about making backups, about control over media, etc etc but you have to admit this does make pirating movies easier (much easier than image-copying DVDs with CSS in tact).
There, now please moderate this down so it doesn't cause a flame war.
Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
What I would want (and pay good money for) is a DVD player that plays this format using regular CD-R's. Kind of like the MP3 CD players, but for video. Like those little discman-sized DVD players (or the VCD players in Asia). Unfortunately, I can imagine the MPAA, DVD-CCA and who knows who else making a fuss over something like that. A guy can dream, though...
I do amateur video (no, not *THAT* kind) for fun, and I know that low-rent videographers like me have been drooling over the thought of being able to make DVD's. You get durability (right now I use a tape drive for archiving video; with DVD I could master right from my archive format), pure digital format, high quality, and portability (you can play on standard home video equipment). The only problem is the high cost of DVD-R drives, media, and DVD authoring software that puts it out of reach. If you can use a standard CD-R recording a standard ISO disc (no new hardware, software, or media), all you would need is a standalone player.
-------------
-------------
The truth is out th- oh, wait, here it is...