Slashdot Mirror
VLC & European Patents
CaptScarlet22 writes " VideoLAN is seriously threatened by software patents due to the
numerous patented techniques it implements and uses. Also threatened
are the many libraries and projects which
VLC is built upon, like
FFmpeg, and the other fellow Free And Open Source software
multimedia players, which include
MPlayer,
xine,
Freevo,
MythTV,
gstreamer."
In the interest of stimulating more discussion, some more information about this subject can be found here
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
On a sidenote, mplayer has the same message on its website. have a look: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/index.html
The general concencious is that software patents are mainly stiffling the ability for new software to be produced. Here's an interesting tid bit about problems with software patents. It's a really interesting read I suggest it. Here it is http://perens.com/Articles/PatentFarming.html
Programmers are generally recommended NOT to investigate patents at all. If they knowingly offend, they pay triple damages when taken to task over it in the US (holy mecca of patent litigation)
The generally accepted practice in the business world is build it without having any awareness that it was previously discovered or patented, then have your lawyers look for infringement and negotiate a deal. The developers, engineers, etc are generally prohibited from going anywhere near patents.
Consciously avoid being exposed to other ppls ideas, reinvent the wheel, employ a bunch of people who could be doing something productive to find out after the fact if anyone has invented this before, and then hope that there's enough revenue for your new idea left after you pay to license the patents.
Kind of puts the lie to the whole "in the interests of progress" thing, doesn't it?
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
If this project disappears then it will be a huge step backwards for digital multimedia. On every system I use this is one of the first packages I install. One cannot trust quicktime or windows media players.
it is semi odd that Europe is anti media players in Windows, and then they are threatening to slay free media players. Seams like a double standard.
Windows Media Player for the Mac is available here.
All your bays are belong to us!
I think you are thinking about trademarks, not patents. Hence why submarine patents are such a big problem.
--- Ãther SPOON!
One stitch of GPL'd code and it is forbidden.
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html Section 7:... "... For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program."
Kopete has a warning message on its site as well.
The most recent version of WMP for Mac only plays .wmv and possiblly .asf files. It doesn't work to play .avi files with the video encoded as wmv3 (WMP video). There is no way at all to play these files on a mac.
The patent system is really, really, screwed!
Two names: Acacia and Forgent Networks. They have INCREDIBLY TRIVIAL patents. And they slaughter good, innovative projects just to suck money out of them. These companies do not produce or innovate ANYTHING. They only beat the money out of other companies with their patent portfolio. The very fact that such companies can exist prove that the USPTO is incompetent when it comes to software patents.
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I've writtent to my MEPs.
:-(
Conservative party are FOR patenting software. The letter was a disgusting patronising excuse, and tries to worm out at the end suggesting they want a 3-year 'review' clause.
(from Nirj Deva)
Green party are AGAINST patenting software. They also mention consulting with Alan Cox and Richard Stallman. A very well written response.
(from Dr Caroline Lucas)
The Liberal party are AGAINST patenting software. A short letter saying they've heard the fears of small businesses are will definately vote against the directive.
Labour never replied but that is because they are FOR the Directive. Especially since Mr Mandelson, kicked out multiple times from government for corruption, is our EU council representative and has the ear of Tony Blair.
No matter how you want to vote in the General Election, remember when voting for your MEP not to vote Labour or Conservative. Even if some of us HAVE voted for a certain party all our lives
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
With all due respect, if there is prior art, put it in front of a judge
It's easy for you to say that I should go to court, but the fact is that if I have to go to court, I have already lost. I would have to settle. I can't afford the legal fees to get to the first day of verbal argument. Nor can any other Open Source developer. You should take into account the fact that the courts are a rich man's game before calling FUD on me.
Regarding basics of computer science, there's a recent one from Microsoft on performing a different action if you press a button twice rather than once that should not have been awarded and IMO the filer purjured himself regarding prior art.
Thanks for admitting that you would prefer to only grant non-obvious patents. The fact is that your job should be very different. You should be given a lot more time to consider a patent and go to the library. You should have a real triviality test - bringing a problem before a jury of developers to solve within a time limit - rather than the joke of one that you have now. And the people who send you patents should have real jail penalties for the way that they purjure themselves.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
I'm Amer^H^oh sorry, Australian.
Our government is a few tiers below the US government wrt authority over Australian Law.
The Australian government has shown that, given the choice of protecting it's citizens or doing something in the US's interests, it will do what the US wants, even when an Australian's human rights are being violated.
The fact that we're not granting frivilous patents here is nice but it's irrelevant if our country is beholden to another country's IP laws. It effectively means that we will be left with fewer patents than other countries and they'll beat us down with their patent portfolios.
Right?
Cheers
Stor
"Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
This claim I don't understand. Having a few (sw related) patents under my belt I can say with some certainty that the language that comes back from the patent attorney filing is much more encompassing and general than what I sent in the first place. But and that's the clincher, it's not the only language in the patent. They read like: In claim one we claim the whole universe, more specifically, in claim two we claim the solar system, in claim three the sun, earth and the moon. Etc down to the actual invention.
I've been told by our patent attorneys that that's done just so that you can start the litigation process and get the ball rolling. The first few claims will be thrown out (then again you might get lucky) but as there are more (and more specific) claims later, the game continues.
Your claim hat I'd be able to defend (or challenge) this system as an open source developer is ludicrous at best. If they sue I've lost. Even stronger: if they threaten to sue, I've lost.
DTS Inc. holds a patent in Europe on that. It is no secret that, for now, official VLC releases no longer support DTS sound decompression.
It is true that VLC violates many many patents that are valid in the United States. It is no wonder why we have no download mirrors in the United States. We did have offers, but we denied them for fear that the people hosting the mirrors might get themselves into trouble.
We DO care. It doesn't mean we make sure not to infringe any patents, but we still do care, because we have had problems, and we expect to have a lot more if the EU directive is passed.
Who knows, we might have to remove MPEG2, MPEG4, H264, etc etc. Who would want a VLC media player that can only read Vorbis and Theora ? (that's not to say these codecs aren't good)
The original aim of the VideoLAN project was to stream TV channels over IP. It turns out all digital TV channels use MPEG2 (or more recently MPEG4 or H264). We couldn't even access these...
Whether we care or not, we have been a target, and we are much weaker than big companies to defend ourselves. We'd be fools not to care.
Remi Denis