Slashdot Mirror


Newest Patent Threat to MPEG-4

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."

8 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. 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?

  2. 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.
  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. 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?
  6. 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.
  7. 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?