Slashdot Mirror
Sorenson Countersues Apple
pinqkandi writes "MacCentral is reporting that Sorenson Media is countersuing Apple over a lawsuit Apple initiated in April claiming they have exclusive rights to Sorenson's codec. Sorenson, claiming Apple's lawsuit against them has severly hurt business, is seeking judgement against Apple in compensation. Apple originally brought on their lawsuit when Sorenson teamed up with Macromedia for Flash MX. Looks like good old Steve is back to his old self :-)"
When you purchase an Apple computer it comes with three coupons for a free OS upgrade. (At least mine did. Both my powerbook and my G4 tower.), So I doubt that they'll be extorting money out of that many users. They definatly won't be taking money from people who just bought macs with 10.1.
For years, Apple and Sorenson have played "Ask you mother" about making a Sorenson decoder available under Linux:
Developer: Sorenson, would you please let us release a binary only, closed version of your decoder for Xanim?
Sorenson: Well, we can't help you - Apple has an exclusive contract with us, so they will have to allow it. Go ask them.
Developer: Apple, would you please let us release a binary only, closed version of your decoder for Xanim?
Apple: Well, it's not ours to release, it belongs to Sorenson. Go ask them.
Now, the two of them are squabbling amonst themselves because Sorenson had the gall to let Macromedia have the decoder.
Boo Hoo Hoo, cry me a river....
www.eFax.com are spammers
Consinder: The only thing that makes platform relevant in modern times (other than number of games available) is the ability of users to interoperate in a networked environment -- to open word processing documents, spreadsheets, presentations, etc. Other than that, people use their computers for largely platform-independant applications (surfing for porn and emailing prison inmates -- or is that just me?).
Given the rise of near-universal networking, you'd think that Apple would see this as their big second change. In fact, given their recent PR, it seems that at least part of the organization "gets" this. And yet, Apple continues to develop and promote decidedly unopen formats like Quicktime, which are definately not friendly to alternative platforms.
Maybe someone needs to drive to Cupertino, take Steve to Denny's and explain the concept of karma over a couple cups of coffee and some cheese sticks. Mmm... Cheese sticks.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Good thing Apple's only sueing Sorenson for licensing their patent to Macromedia despite Apple having an exclusive license (which means Sorenson agreed not to license it to anyone else).
"Looks like good old Steve is back to his old self :-)"
exactly what thats supposed to mean is beyond me. There are good reasons to sue people you know. one of them being if your company signs an exclusive deal with another company for a product then that company turns around and sells the product to a competitor.
oh wait! thats what happened in this case.
--aiee
But wasn't one of the points of Apple's lawsuit to prevent Sorenson from making money that Apple claims Sorenson weren't entitled to?
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Applesue Sorenson
Best Windows Freeware
The central issue seems to be: is the Spark codec a "new" codec, which would not be covered by the exclusive agreement, or a simple renaming of the existing codec to get around the exclusive license?
Of course you are being a troll here - QuickTime is the basis for MPEG4's file format.
The Sorenson codec is proprietary, as is the Cinepak codec, one of the suggested Quicktime codecs for use with Xanim.
Oddly enough, Apple's Quicktime 6, also supports some very fine standards, like the officially sanctioned MPEG4 codecs (not the bastardized pre-standards "MS-MPG4"), the MPEG 1 & 2 codecs, and MJPEG.
Open standards are obviously different than open source, but the net effect to interoperability is the same.
Plus, you can't take Steve to Denny's for cheese sticks - he's Vegan.
And unfortunately those platforms are not very friendly back. I'm beginning to think QuickTime is Apples own worse enemy here - given how long they (or Sorensen) have been jerking open source video makers around, I wasn't surprised to read that an old version of Sorenson had been cracked. How long can it be until the latest versions are too? And what will that mean for the lawsuits?
I, by the way, don't know what to think. Surely Sorenson and Apple have rights to their own creations, but on the other Natalie Portman was available only in their proprietary format. That is like a big neon sign to the geek community saying "Come on, crack me!".
If I was going to create a closed codec, I'd make damn sure there were players for pretty much every platform out there. I'd make high quality players for Windows, Linux and maybe the Mac, and then a library for everybody else so people can write their own players if they need to. Otherwise, the moment good content gets encoded using it, by by secrects.
Chocolate shakes are good, but nothing tops a good cup 'o Denny's java. It's good with everything, from the original Grand Slam breakfast to Denny's late-night favorites like the always-good Moons Over My Hammy.
I consider this in-depth Dennys knowledge proof that I went to high school. Diplomas can be faked, but knowing the contents of the Southern Slam is something that must be learned through hard experience.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
That's okay; I have it on good authority that no actual biological entities are in any way responsible for the various items on the Denny's menu.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Sorenson announced the Nosneros codec for Macromedia products.
After all, it worked for Microsoft nimda's...errrr...admins, I meant *admins*.
Oops.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
The original suite(sp?) was because Apple was terrified that FlashMX producers would use it it to make video using the Sorenson spark codec. The fear is justified because just about everybody has the Flash plug-in and far fewer have the QuickTime plug-In.
My opinion is that Apple is sometimes just plain dumb. If they had just bothered to include the Spark codec in the QuickTime6 engine then everything would have been fine: Video makers and web developers will not go to the extra lengths of having to embed the video in a Flash movie (Time is money!) gladly and would have just made Quicktime movies as per usual. However, it seems Apple didn't think about picking up the phone and calling a few web agencies to ask about the workflow there.
Sometimes they deserve a little slap around the face to wake them up and point them to the world again.
-jhp
/. -- the Free Republic of technology.
Apple's new golden codec is MPEG-4. True, Sorenson is going to release MPEG-4 encoders soon, all the effort that went into sorenson 3 looks to be wasted. How do you make money off of a codec after apple basically abandons it? Re-tool slightly, and sell it to a competitor that would love to get their hands on a sorenson codec. I can see why they are both pissed. Apple pushes a competitor (MPEG-4) and Sorenson makes up for this by selling their codec to a competitor (Macromedia). In my opinion, Apple is the jerk in this situation. They build up this huge relationship over the years, then they drop Sorenson for MPEG-4 in a second.
QuickTime is the basis for MPEG4's file format.
...
Can we have some info on this? How is the MPEG4 Quicktime based
Oddly enough, Apple's Quicktime 6, also supports some very fine standards
Woah, hold no a second. QT does not support any standard. It is just ABLE to play (not sure if encode) files based on open standards. That's for the very reason that the formats are open, not because Apple is nice. They promote the LOCKED soreson as the encoding format, so as to bother everyone else that doesn't have a Mac. They don't even allow QT to play on Linux, BSD and many other OSs. They I fact try to prevent everyone else from viewing movies created on Mac machines.
I am very sorry, but it looks more like your are the one trolling.
unfinished: (adj.)
Sorenson: 1
Us: 0
doesn't that mean Microsoft: 2?
IMHO: it makes no sense for these two companies to be battle this out [and waste (their|our) money] when there are bigger (fish|borgs) to fry.
-braxton
It's open since you can buy the standard - however its not free. It's very expensive.
.doc format.
A closed de-facto standard means that you can't even get the specification of it - like the MS Word
BTW you just found the main difference between open and free software/standard etc.
Since anyone can write a codec they are not part of the standard and are not open. So one can write a player but however you also must pay for the codecs since they also aren't free.
Just saying it like it are.
Apple filed its complaint months ago, suing Sorenson fore breaching an agreement to grant it an exclusive license. Sorenson, now obliged to file its answer after losing preliminary motions, files an Answer with Counterclaims, apparently alleging that the suit has caused them difficulty -- which sounds like an almost certain loser.
What would have been news in a case of this kind would be if Sorenson filed an answer WITHOUT filing a counterclaim.
Sheesh, someone here has been living in a cave for the past couple years, apparently with only a copy of Real Player 8 for company.
- " The QuickTime file format has been used as the basis of the MPEG-4 standard, developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)."
- " [10.9] The MP4 file format is designed to contain the media information of an MPEG-4 presentation in a flexible, extensible format which facilitates interchange, management, editing, and presentation of the media. [...] The design is based on the QuickTime® format from Apple Computer Inc."
But don't take my word for it -- look it up for yourself.They promote the LOCKED soreson as the encoding format
And here again you are living in the past. Take a look at the Apple Quicktime site right now. You will see a whole lot of promotion of their MPEG-4 cross-compatible codec. Ever since the MPEG-4 project began, Apple has been salivating at the prospects of ditching Sorenson.
Apple used to push in favor of Sorenson, because: (1) it was the best codec, and (2) it was exclusive to QuickTime. Neither of those factors are true any more.
Actually, at the Macworld conference this week, Steve Jobs stressed in his keynote that Apple was embracing open standards. Quicktime 6, which he officially announced this week, uses MPEG-4. He repeatedly proclaimed that it is completely open.
Apparently Steve likes cheese sticks too.
Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
* " The QuickTime file format has been used as the basis of the MPEG-4 standard
.mov files a real problem and have always been for me.
Only File Format ideas where taken from QT, as far as the document you link to tells (and the File Format section is about 1% of the total file). Is that so crucial as to say it's "Quicktime Based"? Well nope.
Apple used to push in favor of Sorenson, because: (1) it was the best codec, and (2) it was exclusive to QuickTime.
Apparently, they still want it to be exclusive. If not, they wouldn't be suing soreson, right? Also, I must point out that QT was not the best codec (for my taste at least). So 1) is arguable and 2) is false.
Now, I like Apple a lot. But Quicktime is not one of the things in "thanks" list (which is quite long). I like to give credit where it is, and
unfinished: (adj.)
... Quicktime, you'll find that it is one of the key technologies that lead to the development of modern computer multimedia.
.avi files. All my kudos go to whoever did, promoted and developed and pushed mpeg standards (and jpgs).
I couldn't comment on that. What really changed everything (in my case) was mpeg layer3 audio and mpeg2 video.
If they owe anything to quicktime, bless them. That doesn't change the fact that QT was/is a problem, as the
unfinished: (adj.)
When will people learn the difference between a file format and a codec? The QuickTime API and file format are open and well documented. You want to write a player for QuickTime files? Go ahead: Apple won't stop you. Want to reverse-engineer and implement the API? Good luck. But QuickTime is a container format: you can plug whatever codecs you want into it. The Sorenson 3 codec, which, due to it being pretty fucking good, is the most popular for QuickTime video, is only available for Mac and Windows. Hence the problem.
This all becomes irrelevant with QuickTime 6 though, as it's expected content providers will move to using the superior and open AVC codec. Interoperability at last.
You are correct! And what I mean is that the crucial difference are the codecs not the containers.
.asf, maybe .mov).
.mov file format is open. If not, then it will only cause non mac users headaches.
If the container is not open it causes problems for everyone that doesn't have access to the propietary format. It really becomes a problem (.avi,
Regarding Apple, I'd be glad is mpeg4 is the default encoding option and the
unfinished: (adj.)