Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Newest Patent Threat to MPEG-4

Posted by Zonk on from the there-has-to-be-something,-right? dept.

Sachin Garg writes "After the notorious JPEG patent which has made many big and small names pay huge amounts to Forgent (total more than $105 million), PCMag reports that AT&T claims to have a patent covering core MPEG-4 technology and has warned Apple and others of Patent Infringement. Pentax and Nero have already paid them."

17 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. Typical by DoddyUK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1) Help to form new "revolutionary" file format.
    2) Wait for it to take off and become popular
    3) Use new file format popularity to hold companies to ransom thanks to the incompetancy of the current USPTO system.
    4) ...
    5) PROFIT!

    But honestly, is this the way for people to get their money nowadays? Claim "prior art" on any patent which seems convenient and then hold any company which uses the format to cut a hole in their wallet? Any patent issues should be resolved before a file format is made readily available, therefore any companies who happen to use the format will know of any pitfalls.

    I still admit that this may be nothing compared to the JPEG patent (which about 99.9% of websites use), but it still seems silly, just like any other USPTO story which is posted on /.

    Oh, and FP :)

    --
    Some think the Internet is a bad thing. I just think that AOL is a bad thing.
    1. Re:Typical by rs79 · · Score: 4, Funny

      " If MPEG-4 or something like it existed before the patent was filed, that would be an example of prior art."

      Hey I remember seeing an implementatio of what would fall under these patents twentry years ago. There were these cool videophon... oh shit.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
  2. And I have a patent for ... by neonprimetime · · Score: 5, Funny

    And I have a patent for Windows Viruses ... so ya 'all better stop writing them or I'll sue your @ss.

    Is AT&T Serious?

    1. Re:And I have a patent for ... by dave-tx · · Score: 4, Funny
      And I have a patent for Windows Viruses ... so ya 'all better stop writing them or I'll sue your @ss.

      You'll do better if you go after end-users.

      --

      >> "What would the robut do? Frame someone!"

  3. Pay Me Instead by mfh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nobody ever taught me about how lucrative this patent business was in school. Here I am, just a small-time dev working at an electronics shop to support my family. I need to patent something!

    I think Nero paid because they don't want to be shut down. AT&T could easily hold up a small company in court for years, bleeding their profits dry. I guess someone just did the math and figured it would be cheaper to pay off the patent mafia.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:Pay Me Instead by Zeinfeld · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The patent system is an utter mess but I am not sure this is really evidence of abuse. AT&T may well have a genuine claim, they have certainly spent a huge amount developing compression technologies.

      Bell labs was a patent factory, they invested billions a year on research. Bell labs is an example of how the system is meant to work. Spend a non trivial amount on research, get a limited term monopoly in the invention in return.

      There are many other patent holders getting royalties from MPEG4, why not AT&T if they have a valid claim?

      I am not opposed to software patents in general, just the junk ones, which means at least 98%. The real problem is that the USPTO does not follow the rules it is supposed to. See my blog essay.

      One of the problems with the current patent system is that there are so many junk patents being circulated by the trolls that the claims of genuine inventors are devalued.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
  4. XVID? by Danathar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How would this affect open source/freeware implementations of standardized codecs like H.264?

  5. ffmpeg? by Se7enLC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about ffmpeg? I assume that will also be affected, as they provide MPEG-4 compression/decompression. What happens when you try to collect licensing fees from an open source project?

  6. More like TradeMarks by RingDev · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe I'm completely off base, but I think I remember hearing that if you don't defend your trade mark, you can lose your rights to it. Patents should be the same way, if you knowingly allow your patent to be infringed apon for 3 years and never so much as mention it to the infringer, why should you have the right to sue?

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:More like TradeMarks by SchrodingersRoot · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's called genericization, or "genericide." If a word becomes used often enough by the public regardless of branding, the courts can declare a trademark a generic word.
      Heroin, Allen wrenches, and I think Spandex (Hence the new name Lycra) are all examples of this. There are many more, and there are plenty of companies that have trademarks that would appear to be in danger of "genericide" (the apparent legal term).

      Xerox actually was in danger of this, and started a campaign against "xeroxing", strongly suggesting that people instead "photocopy" documents.

  7. Is it any wonder innovation is slowing? by Caspian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Christ. Look at the earthshaking technologies that were invented/discovered and/or popularized in the interval from roughly 1860 to 1960: Radio, the telephone, the television, the laser, nuclear fission, the automobile, the airplane, the rocket, the microwave oven, the computer...

    Now look at what we've achieved since then. Uhhh..... let's see. Um. PDAs? ... Blackberries? ... Cell phones? (read: radio + telephone)... umm ... well, our computers are smaller now, and faster?...

    I cannot help but think that the shift away from R&D, the overreliance on patents like this story, and the constant threat of being sued/bought out by megacorps have combined to slow the pace of human technological development.

    The new business model seems to be "obtain patent on a niggling detail of a process or device; sue over patent; profit!". Back in the day, the business model was "Research fascinating new things; patent them; bring them to market; profit." I'm all for a return to the old model...

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    1. Re:Is it any wonder innovation is slowing? by thefirelane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Now look at what we've achieved since then. Uhhh..... let's see. Um. PDAs? ... Blackberries? ... Cell phones? (read: radio + telephone)... umm ... well, our computers are smaller now, and faster?...

      ummm... did you miss everything that has happened in biology and DNA lately? Electronics has just moved into the incremental consumer phase, instead of being a strict labratory science. Things like DNA sequencing, stem cells, cloning, nano-technology, and genetic engineering are where the real advancements are.

  8. Yes, that's the whole point. by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Or is suing 'late in the game' now the norm for patent lawyers?

    Sue early: people say 'Ah, well we'll just use some other video codec, then.'

    Sue late: people say 'Shit, we've committed our whole business to this technology. Better pay up.'

    There's more profit to be had this way, which is why it's done like this. What, you expected some ethical or technical reason?

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  9. And to any "pro-business" (pro-patent) types... by Caspian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Before you start in on your rose-tinted "but we have Teh Intarweb now, and computers are so cheap thanks to the Free Market(TM)" drek...

    Yeah? And? Where are the flying cars we were all supposed to have? Where's our fusion energy? (Other than that big fiery lamp out in the Big Room) Where's our moonbase? Where's our Mars colony? Where's my fucking robot sex toy?

    We'd have all of this shit by now if humanity were focused more on developing as a species and less on making money with the least possible effort. We need more cooperation as a species-- and note that "cooperation" and "competition" aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. During the Space Race, broad swaths of humanity came together and cooperated to compete-- the West versus the soviet East. What did we accomplish? We went from the first suborbital flight to landing on the fucking moon in less than a decade.

    THAT is what humanity can do when its priorities are aligned properly.

    Now, it's Megacorp A versus Megacorp B versus Megacorp C, and they're all so busy playing chess with patents and lawsuits, they can't be bothered to innovate. It's fucking sickening.

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
  10. You don't need your step 4 by Soybean47 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The point of a "..." or "????" step is that it's not clear how to get from the previous step to the following one. In this case, there's no "..." step. There's just proft.

  11. Re:Typical (Submarine patents) by mikael · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But honestly, is this the way for people to get their money nowadays? Claim "prior art" on any patent which seems convenient and then hold any company which uses the format to cut a hole in their wallet?

    This is an example of submarine patents. You have an idea, quietly patent it, but noisily advertise the technology. Then you wait for the patents to be granted and for industry to incorporate your technology into their products. Once the market has matured, you fire off multiple patent violations in every direction. By then, the cost of removing your technology from their products will cost far more than it would to pay the license fee.
    (For digital file formats, this is especially true, since both software and hardware codecs will already have been distributed, and third party customers will have distributed their data into this format.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  12. Patent system disfunctionality is deliberate. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Informative

    Some people claim that the US patent system is broken, but that way of expressing the problem is a bit misleading. The word "broken" implies that something undefined caused the patent system to be disfunctional. That's not what happened. The disfunctionality was caused deliberately. Those who want government corruption so that they can make money have caused the patent system to be underfunded. They've done the same to the Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Here are short reviews of books about the corruption: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government.