SanDisk MP3 Players Seized in MP3 Licence Dispute

MrSteveSD writes "According to the BBC, German officials have seized Sandisk's MP3 players at the IFA show in Berlin. The Italian company Sisvel claims that Sandisk has refused to pay license fees for the MP3 codec. Sisvel President Roberto Dini has said that Sandisk could get an edge over competitors by not paying the fees. How much are proprietary format licensing fees pushing up the cost of consumer goods?"

Comments

My First First Post

[poormanjoe]

Please don't seize it from me!

Re:My First First Post

[Anonymous Coward]

Der Post ist hiermit beschlagnahmt. Melden Sie sich unverzüglich bei der nächsten Gestapo-Geschäftsstelle.

Re:My First First Post

[Korin43]

There should be mod points for +1/2 "Funny but no one will understand it"

Re:My First First Post

[hummassa]

"this post is hereby seized. present yourself to the nearest Gestapo office" or somesuch. You know, this is Google (Altavista?) language tools era. Ninguém tem desculpa para não entender algo porque está em outro idioma.

Re:My First First Post

[MrSteveSD]

Alle deine codecs sind gehören uns!

Patenting a Form?

[w33t]

This doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I guess it should, but how can one patent a format?

I mean, I can see patenting an algorithm (an original implementation) that allows you to effeciently encode/decode a particular format - or even patenting hardware that works specifically with those formats.

But the format itself?

Why must you pay fees if you develop your very own, original and novel algorithm for decoding the mp3 file format?

I'm just having trouble wrapping my brain around this for some reason.

Patenting a format just feels like patenting a poetic form or something. Sure, you can write an original poem and copyright it, that seems common sense...but claiming the poet must pay licensing just for making their poem a haiku?

It just seems absurd to me.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[RPoet]

I suppose they don't have their own novel algorithm for decoding MP3. Such a thing, if it existed (which it probably cannot), would clearly dodge any patent fee claims.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[atomicstrawberry]

It's not the file format that's patented.

The problem is that the patents are for the actual compression and decompression algorithms. These can and often are patented - MP3 is not an isolated case. Here's a list of the patents involved.

The whole thing's actually quite a mess, with several different companies claiming patents on bits and pieces of the codec. This is one of the reasons why you don't usually see MP3 codecs in the free Linux distributions as standard.

The problem for SanDisk is that they're a US-based company, and the US allows software patents. Sisvel would struggle to be able to pull this on an EU-based company.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the format that is patented. It's the algorithms used in the codec.

With this article I don't understand what is going on with the patent licensing now. I thought the patent was owned by Fraunhofer Gesellschaft and that they only required licenses for encoders, not players. Doing a search though I found that there in currently a patent ownership dispute between Fraunhofer and Sisvel. (Sisvel which is an Italian company that I have no idea who they are.)

What is even weirder, I thought that software patents were illegal in Europe.

The good news is that the mp3 patent expires in Apr 2010.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[Anonymous Coward]

A long time ago (more than 5 years) the people who make xmms got very nervous about using the traditional methods of encoding/playback of MP3. Ogg Vorbis came along, but not before a completely different method was created (same end result, but different way of getting there). Basically a tautology of the first method. So does 2+3=5 or is it really 3+2, or 4+1? If Sandisk is using the software method developed and released under the GPL, then you are trying to enforce patent on a format, rather than a method. As one reader posted, its like copyrighting 'music', rather than just a single song. As for saying 'there is no other way to do it', either the attorney is uninformed, or is professing a lie. It isn't even that the algorithm is the same but the code is different. Here, the algorithms are different too.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[w33t]

Now that is an interesting point you make. A bit of reading has led me to wonder if one could indeed not write a novel algorithm for decoding MP3.

Of course, I do not find any examples of an algorithm written to produce a result for which a different algorithm can be created which achieves the same result. But I am by no means an expert in such things - I would be interested to see such an example though.

Now, to clairify - I do not claim that I think a novel algorithm could be written which would be as effecient as the current, proprietary ones. But with modern processing power (even with mobile electronics) it seems a company could afford a less-effecient algorithm so long as that algorithm were original and non-infringing.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[TheRaven64]

The PsyTEL AAC encoder does not use the Dolby-patented algorithms, and is generally regarded as the best quality encoder in the consumer space.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[Fordiman]

novel algorithm for decoding MP3. Such a thing, if it existed (which it probably cannot)

Actually, novel algorithms exist for both encoding and decoding. It's then believable that Sandisk built their MP3 players without any Frauenhoffer code.

This is more like the .GIF debacle - where a company claims responsibility for all code that creates or reads the format they designed. It's obviously bullshit, but apparently Frauenhoffer don't take US victories for free-and-open use as precedent.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[joeljkp]

LAME is novel? What about:

1) "Using the LAME encoding engine (or other mp3 encoding technology) in your software may require a patent license in some countries." (http://lame.sourceforge.net/about.html)

2) the fact that Debian won't ship it?

Re:Patenting a Form?

[Fordiman]

It's still doing it a different way than Frauenhaufer does; It's called LAME 'cos LAME Ain't an Mp3 Encoder. It's something different, that creates files that behave very much like mp3s are expected to.

Re:Patenting a Form?

[joeljkp]

No, LAME is a bonafide MP3 encoder. From their webpage: "LAME is an LGPL MP3 encoder."

Re:Patenting a Form?

[Fartacus]

You're right, you can't patent a format or an interface. But Fraunhauffer & Thompson (sp?) have patented so many different areas of MP3 decoding and encoding that it's impossible to decode an MP3 without violating the patents.

I've done a good bit of MP3 encoder development, both in hardware and software, in the past, so I'm pretty familiar with the algorithms involved. If I recall correctly, the hybrid polyphase filter, the MDCT, the use of short block MDCT (and short block FFT in the psychoacoustic model), and the use of fixed Huffman code pages in the bitstream coder are all patented. There are probably other patented algorithms that I'm forgetting about.

The part of the MP3 encodeing and decoding that I don't think can be worked around with a different algorithm is the bitstream coding. MP3 uses a fixed set of Huffman code tables (31 different tables if I recall correctly, it's been a while). The id of the code table used for a frame is put into the frame header, and the samples in that frame are encoded/decoded using that code table. I don't see how you could decode the bitstream without using the specific code table used to encode it. I believe both the use of fixed code tables in an encoder, and the use of the specific code tables in MP3 are patented.

Compatibility?

[RyogaHibiki]

Shouldn't this fall under the law (I forget the exact description) that allows a company to provide a product "compatible" to a format/standard/etc. without having to buy a license as long as they don't use the patented program/codec? IE - OpenOffice will open/save MS Word Docs.... Same thing??

Re:Compatibility?

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFA (emphasis mine):

German officials seized MP3 players from SanDisk's booth at the IFA show in Berlin after an Italian patents firm won an injunction against the company.

[...]

SanDisk also faces a lawsuit brought by Sisvel in a German court, but denies that its products infringe patents.

Not sure exactly which law you're referring to, but the article mentions at least two distinct jurisdictions (although both part of the EU). From Wikipedia, SanDisk is a "US-based multi-national corporation," so God only knows how ugly this may or may not get. Perhaps somebody who knows a lot more than myself about this could clarify?

Re:Compatibility?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's thinking of copyright law. A valid defense against copyright infringement claims is that you were forced to copy for the sake of interoperability.

The issue here with the MP3 codec is patents, which is why that doesn't apply.

Re:Compatibility?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since this involves EU companies, does "fair use" apply?

Re:Compatibility?

[KDR_11k]

What's fair use of a patent?

Re:Compatibility?

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

Fair use is a 3 option process:
1. Buy a patent
2. Sell a patent
3. Bribe the US patent office to grant your rediculously vague, sweepingly generalized "patent"

Re:Compatibility?

[Fastolfe]

If they don't use the patented algorithms, then there's no patent infringement and they can do whatever they want. The problem is, the MP3 data can't really be interpreted and converted to sound without implementing those algorithms and infringing on those patents.

Of course, I can't begin to fathom how courts in other countries deal with patents, but I suspect they're not all that different from one another, and I'm not aware of a "fair use" for patents that would act as an affirmitive defense against patent infringement. But I could be wrong about that.

Re:Compatibility?

[Chandon Seldon]

There is no such law. It would be nice if there were, but there isn't.

You may be thinking of the fact that there is no law that makes reverse engineering illegal, and the fact that the mechanics of copyright make "clean room" duplications of functionality legal - that stuff is true but has nothing to do with patents.

If you patent something, you have a legal monopoly on anything that a court would rule the patent to cover, reguarless of who built the implementation.

it isn't open or closed it is patents

[mAIsE]

If Apple based everything they did on ogg and a company that has patents that ogg violates could then sue the pants off of apple. Patents are probably a very good reason to keep things closed so even if they a company is violating a patent no one knows and they can do their buisness.

This should no longer be an issue

[ChrisLTD]

How long has the MP3 technology been around? Shouldn't this sort of thing have entered the public domain if there was any sanity in the Intellectual Property system?

Re:This should no longer be an issue

[Anonymous Coward]

then none of these pricks could make any money off it ;)

Re:This should no longer be an issue

[sangreal66]

How long has the MP3 technology been around? Shouldn't this sort of thing have entered the public domain if there was any sanity in the Intellectual Property system?

In the US, patents last for 25 years. To put things in perspective, the patents on compact discs won't expire until next year. MP3 was developed in the early 90s

Re:This should no longer be an issue

[Anonymous Coward]

mp3 is built on 80s tech.

Re:This should no longer be an issue

[segedunum]

This whole area is pretty hazy. In Europe, the MP3 patent shouldn't apply. In the US, if you look at the supposed MP3 patent it doesn't mention MP3 in the slightest. What it describes is a way of compressing a music file, which of course, has broad applications. The only reason why silly companies looking for some easy money choose to pick on MP3 is that the MP3 format is the most ubiquitous.

Re:This should no longer be an issue

[segedunum]

Replying to myself, but certainly from the article the fact that the patent does not specify MP3 and define it as a solid format is solidified a bit:

"An expert opinion from one of the founders of MP3 digital audio compression substantiates SanDisk's position. SanDisk is not infringing any patent in the pending litigation."

This is also confirmed by the wish-washy comments from the supposed patent holder:

"By definition you have to follow the standard," Mr de Sanctis said.

"It is just not possible to do it any other way," he said.

They're either deliberately misinterpreting their own patent, or they don't understand it. The fact that something can play an MP3, or encode it, doesn't mean that it infringes the so called MP3 patent. The patent specifies a method of compression, and by definition, you only infringe if you are using this exact method.

I hope this goes much further. This could get quite interesting, and I may even buy one of those player :-). I didn't know SanDisk had players.

Re:This should no longer be an issue

[TapeCutter]

"silly companies"

An Italian(EU) company uses US laws to shut down a US company's stand at a German(EU) show. Someone is being silly but it's not the Italians!

Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[l0ungeb0y]

"How much are proprietary format licensing fees pushing up the cost of consumer goods?"

You know, it takes money to make money.

I've realised in the last few years I am a conservative.
It's a tough pill to swallow seeing how a fascist movement headed by Karl Rove has usurped and taken a steaming squat all over the name of conservatism. But I believe that if a man makes something of value or merit, he should be rewarded for that effort.
And a farkin licensing fee or royalty compensation is A-O-Fuggin-K in my book.

So you can rail and wail into the night about how royalties and licenses are raising the prices.
And I will be there to bitch slap you down and tell you that that's the price you pay for not being able to make it yourself.
You want OSS/GNU et al? Great, it's there and it serves it point, it's needed.
But as long as we live in a Capitalist society where it costs money to live day to day, so a man needs to earn his way.

So my little Communist buddy, you want it for free and expect that the market should not be burdend by license or royalty?
Then go and make another codec that can compete with the commercial versions that prevail on the open market and give it away for free.
Then you will have made a difference, until then, shut your hole and quit yer bitchin'.

If SanDisk can't play by the rules, then they should get their hands slapped and taken out of the cookie jar.
If this is a bogus complaint, then SanDisk can get remedy next year via settlement.
The parties here are all adults and can afford their respective outcomes.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Tharkban]

Then go and make another codec that can compete with the commercial versions that prevail on the open market and give it away for free.

kind of like this?
http://www.vorbis.com/

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh please you stupid fuckhead. SanDisk's not paying royalties has nothing to do with Communism or Socialism or anything other than Capitalism and Corporatism.

Fuck you.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[phulegart]

Yeah, exactly like that. Then, don't use the proprietary format anymmore. Then, whenever you see someone complaining about how the priorietary format costs money, assist in shouting them down, as well as directing them to vorbis.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[l0ungeb0y]

That's OGG and while OGG has it's place, we're talking MP3 codec.
SanDisk and others in the music player market need MP3 codecs to even consider a media player release.
OGG codec is a nice to have.

So I'm not getting your point. Or were you somehow trying to say "we should all ditch MP3 for OGG because OGG is license free"?
If that's the case, then stop mumbling and just come out and say it, then we could all have a laugh at your expense and be friends.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Frogular]

But I believe that if a man makes something of value or merit, he should be rewarded for that effort. And a farkin licensing fee or royalty compensation is A-O-Fuggin-K in my book.

I think we all agree that inventors of good ideas should be protected. But don't you think that 20 years for a term of patent is way too long? The primary argument for patents is that innovation should be rewarded - but how long does it really take to turn a profit on a great idea? 5? 10 years?

The issue with patent law in general is that with a term of 20 years, the inventor gets 20 years of monopoly profits while the consumer gets screwed with 20 years of monopoly and price gouging.

A good way to reduce the amount of people getting screwed would be to base the term of patent by field/sector/some sort of estimate on how long it takes to break even in that sector. Take that, x, and add some years, say 5, as reward. This way, innovation continues and the consumer gets screwed only x+5 years instead of 20 years. I'm pretty sure x will turn out to be much smaller than 15.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[phulegart]

right on.

Mod up.

to all those screaming about how MP3 should be free and yadda yadda... let them go to work at their jobs, without getting paid at all. Let them have all their efforts be recognized, praised and placed in heavy demand all over the world, and then not get a dime. But most of all, let them not get paid at their current jobs. That way, when they end up broke and homeless, they finally understand what it's like to have your ideas stolen.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[rm999]

dude, rtfa.

"An expert opinion from one of the founders of MP3 digital audio compression substantiates SanDisk's position. SanDisk is not infringing any patent in the pending litigation."

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Anonymous Coward]

But as long as we live in a Capitalist society where it costs money to live day to day, so a man needs to earn his way.

So my little Communist buddy, you want it for free and expect that the market should not be burdend by license or royalty?

I think you're a little confused about capitalism. Cartels (the essential problem behind proprietary format adoption) are inimical to capitalism. They are the opposite of competition. When a proprietary format becomes the de facto standard due not to its superiority, but due to its selection by the established companies, it's not a success of capitalism.

I've noticed a lot of pseudo-capitalists like to bandy out the insult of "communism" when they want to endorse anticompetitive systems. It's actually the opposite, though; these people are far closer to practical "communists" (desiring centralized control by whoever already has the money or power) than those they attack.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Venik]

Actually, from first-hand experience I can tell you that we (in the US) most definitely live in a developed Socialist society. You just never lived in the USSR, I assume. Back to the patent/licensing issue, though. I agree, if I come up with something useful that also happens to be in demand, I would like my share of the pie. I see no reason why anyone should enjoy the fruits of my labor for free, unless I want them to. This is regardless of whether someone uses my work directly or tries to build on top of it - I would want a piece of the action.

I guess, in a situation like this, it all boils down to whether or not I, the patent holder, and the potential licensees want to be reasonable. These two definitions of what's "reasonable" quickly grow apart as the amount of potential profit increases. It's OK to be greedy. If in the end that MP3 costs too much for the target consumer, then everyone will lose and new arrangements will be made. On the other hand, patents should never stand in the way of progress. Patents are routinely used to squash competition and unfairly increase the profit margin at the consumer's expense.

The entire patent system is a part of our society. It should benefit the society. And if it doesn't, then it should be swapped for something more user friendly, regardless of whether the users are capitalist conservatives or pinko commies.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[CoughDropAddict]

And a farkin licensing fee or royalty compensation is A-O-Fuggin-K in my book.

The problem is when formats that we use to communicate are encumbered by patents.

It's not enough just to make something better. We've already done that: it's called Vorbis. The inventors of MP3 are now profiting not on the merit of their technology, but the sheer inertia that you get when one format is a dominant standard.

It's just like GIF: PNG is better than GIF is nearly every way, and yet the computing world was stuck paying Unisys for years for their inferior technology, simply because GIF was entrenched.

That's why we "communist buddies" insist on unencumbered standards when it comes to the protocols and formats we use to communicate. We're not interested in writing checks indefinitely for the privilege of sending data to other people, or putting it on devices. It would be one thing if these technologies competed on merit alone, and if you could quickly drop one when a better one became available, but it doesn't work that way.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Famatra]

"you want it for free and expect that the market should not be burdend by license or royalty?"

If you are a full free-market capitalist then indeed you wouldn't want government intervening in the market with enforcement of patents and copyright and licenses with royalties, or intervening in general.

I guess since you enjoy government intervention you might want to think about that before you start calling other people 'communist's.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Rix]

I wouldn't agree, but it is a reasonable arguement in some sectors. However, it completely falls apart when applied to standards, which mp3 certainly is. Sandisk can't go and roll their own audio compression algorithm, because it wouldn't be compatable with the standardized files everyone uses. (Which is also why no one uses ogg vorbis...)

There needs to be a method to deal with generification in patents.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[zmollusc]

I think the reason that so many people have little respect for licence fees, royalties etc is that so few people individuals receive them.
Most folks' employment is of the form "i get a flat rate and any beneficial thing i come up with benefits only my employer, if i don't come up with beneficial things i get fired". The employer gets to make as much money as it can prise out of the marketplace for the employees ideas/labour etc. Since business is obliged to seek the lowest bidding supplier unless they are forced to do otherwise, ordinary wage slaves feel justified in seeking the lowest cost supplier, such as P2P.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Tharkban]

I was merely making the point that someone HAS made a free codec and given it away for free. (hence why I quoted that passage)

and btw, I wouldn't buy an "mp3" player that doesn't support ogg. What good is a portable media player that can't play my music collection? I got sick of dealing with mp3's a long time ago. You can start laughing now.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[bersl2]

I don't disagree with everything you're saying, but I do take exception to the intensity and the spite of your argument.

It is a reasonable compromise to grant things like patents and copyrights. However, the current timeframes are out of sync with the pace of information creation and transfer. Entire generations are born and die before their culture---if you even at all recognize that what authors, artists, writers, and the like produce belongs* to all of humanity---whether popular or obscure, ever legally passes to the people and to other producers of culture. Entire generations of products are many times obsolete before their key methods and concepts, perhaps already well-known, may be used freely in mature, more perfectly competitive market, to the point where price level without the patent is effectively zero (e.g., FOSS). The artificial pace imposed by the legal constructs are greatly out of sync with the actual pace of science, technology, and culture.

Yes, an entity deserves to be compensated for its mental labor. But if the compensation goes on for too long, the entity will be more inclined to allow its work to stagnate. Now, this particular case is complicated by failures in other markets (remember, this is the music cartel we're talking about), but I would consider MP3 to be stagnant. More advanced formats have come out, with better quality than what MP3 offers; but then again, many of them may only come with the price of DRM, making files in those markets inferior goods, perhaps even in the technical sense of the term.

All I'm suggesting is that you really take a look at what it is that you're backing. Ask yourself if it's the proper compromise between individual and collective interests, keeping in mind the increasing tendency of information to favor the collective, and the law's increasing tendency to favor the individual; do you support the discord of the status quo?

* Well, having now looked at your bio, I expect a nasty flame in response to this tinderbox of an opinion. :P

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Tim Browse]

So my little Communist buddy

Gosh, do people really still use 'communist' as an insult?

How terribly quaint.

I expect I should get back to Russia, or something.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[xtracto]

. They are the opposite of competition. When a proprietary format becomes the de facto standard due not to its superiority, but due to its selection by the established companies, it's not a success of capitalism.

I believe that MP3 is one of the few file formats that has gained popularity by its own merits. I mean, if you look at the story of MP3 it was at the right place at the right time.

MP3 popularity was mostly due to, and interchangeable with, the successes of companies and software packages like Nullsoft's Winamp (released in 1997), mpg123, and Napster (released in 1999). Those programs made it very easy for the average user to playback, create, share, and collect MP3s.

So, the fact that all the digital media player manufacturers want to provide compatibility for that format is in my humble opinion just the product of pure demand. MP3 is then a standard in the industry. I think that, the problem is that this standard is encumbered with a number of patents, but as somebody else said, for all the DMP manufacturers it is worth it. Really, have you seeen ANY media player that DOES NOT play MP3 files?

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[jimicus]

but how long does it really take to turn a profit on a great idea? 5? 10 years?

Let's see....

It's already been discussed elsewhere in this thread that the MP3 patents expire in 2010. Assuming a 25-year patent life (I don't know Italian law), that means they were issued around 1985.

How many MP3 players do you know of that existed in 1985? For that matter, how many people had computers on their desk which could encode an audio CD in a reasonable time?

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Anonymous Coward]

How terribly quaint.

I expect I should get back to Russia, or something.

Why? After all, in communism, Russia gets back to you!

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Anonymous Coward]

And that's also why us "libertarian buddies" insist that ideas are not property, and patents are void.

Welcome on board.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Epeeist]

> If you are a full free-market capitalist then indeed you wouldn't want government intervening in the market with enforcement of patents and copyright and licenses with royalties, or intervening in general.

If you are a free market capitalist then you probably regard government as just another product that you should be able to purchase.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[ajs318]

Actually the idea was never to reward people just for creating new stuff, but for sharing the stuff they crated with the world. And it all went to pot when people were allowed (1) to set their own licencing fee and (2) to charge different licencing fees to different entities, or bar some entities altogether.

Anyway, pure mathematics is not created. It just exists. Zero existed before arabic numerals, even if there wasn't a way to write it; the same as fractions existed before there was a convenient way to write them, and irrational numbers exist even if they can't be represented exactly. Complex numbers existed before anyone had the idea for j.

Have a look at this kid's book for an easy-to-understand explanation of patent misuse.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[tehcyder]

Cartels ... are inimical to capitalism.

Yes, but to stop cartels/monopolies or whatever, the government has to intervene, and this confuses the hell out of the rabid free-marketeers as the now legendary "invisible hand" has been shown not to work.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Qzukk]

that's the price you pay for not being able to make it yourself.

Seems here that Sandisk was having no problem making it themselves.

Oh I get it, you think that this other company should just make money off of Sandisk's hard work. To each corporation according to their needs after all.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[tehcyder]

Actually, from first-hand experience I can tell you that we (in the US) most definitely live in a developed Socialist society

I would love to hear what your definition of "Socialist" is, because it's obviously not the same as the rest of the planet's.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[tehcyder]

If you are a full free-market capitalist then indeed you wouldn't want government intervening in the market with enforcement of patents and copyright and licenses with royalties, or intervening in general.

So how would this full free-market work in terms of rewarding invention then?
If I stole your idea/process/blueprints and sold the resuling product how would you seek financial compensation? Sue me? But if a court has the power to compel payment, what is the difference between this and a government?
Not being a great believer in capitalism myself, I'm curious.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[sheldon]

It's a tough pill to swallow seeing how a fascist movement headed by Karl Rove has usurped and taken a steaming squat all over the name of conservatism. But I believe that if a man makes something of value or merit, he should be rewarded for that effort.

Karl Rove hasn't done anything to conservatism. Bushie is exactly what the Republicans have always been, a prime defender of corporations against competition.

Believing that a man should be rewarded for making something of merit, is a liberal concept.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[tinkerghost]

I believe the concept of zero originated on the Indian sub-continent not with the arabs - that's just where the Europeans got it.
Also, but not useful in a western history discussion, the Myans also developed the concept.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Overzeetop]

Presumably you would be first to market, and since you developed the idea it would follow that you would have the greatest insight in developing and enhancing the product. By this way , you could continually inmprove your product, and you would always be first to market giving you an advantage that the "copycats" did not have. Of course, you might well have higher R&D costs, but that's what it take to be "the best". You would then be required to compete on continuous innovation and quality (and, of course, brand) with the other players in the market.

That doesn't mean you would win. Look at Oreos. They were the copy of Hydrox cookies. Sometimes the innovator doesn't win. Sunshine Biscuit, somehow, still survived.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Dun Malg]

I would love to hear what your definition of "Socialist" is, because it's obviously not the same as the rest of the planet's.

I would love to hear what the "rest of the world's" definition of socialism is, as the textbook definition leans heavily on the notion of state control of the means of production. Most of the world's "socialist" countries fail that definition. Nowadays it seems to be used to describe varying degrees of state involvement in various parts of the economy (e.g. medicine), paid for by moderately high tax rates. By that measure, either of you could be correct. Basically it devolves into a pissing match over which country is throwing more money at which segment of society.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Dun Malg]

If you are a free market capitalist then you probably regard government as just another product that you should be able to purchase.

But that's not just some rabid free market capitalist view, that's actually the case with all government, and always has been. The means of purchasing government favor are generally disguised in various ways to give the appearance of propriety, but it's there just the same. The only way of mitigating this unavoidable condition is to ensure government remains as small and powerless as possible.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Dun Malg]

I believe the concept of zero originated on the Indian sub-continent not with the arabs

The concept of our modern base-10 notation originated in india, but the symbolic representation of a stand-alone null value goes back to the babylonians and the bizarre mixed-base sexagesimal system. At any rate, none of this is particularly relevant. The point still stands: zero existed as a mathematical concept even before the invention of any one of its various incarnations (mayan, babylonian, indian, arabic).

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Wooloomooloo]

According to mp3licensing.com, the royalty rate is 75 cents per device ($1.25 for the mp3Pro version). I have no idea of how much SanDisk's MP3 players cost or how many they've sold but I don't think an extra dollar in the price tag would have hurt their sales.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[Harry Coin]

I've realised in the last few years I am a conservative.

During this administration? Wow. That's quite an achievement.

But I believe that if a man makes something of value or merit, he should be rewarded for that effort.

So, should women get royalties on their work, or is a penis required? Are ideas "things of value or merit" that can be owned (i.e. denied to other people through force)? They didn't used to be.

And a farkin licensing fee or royalty compensation is A-O-Fuggin-K in my book.

You must be a conservative if you have the urge for vulgar language but try to hide it behind made-up words. Grow the fuck up.

P.S. I have a trademark on the word "Fuggin", please cease and desist all use of my valuable intellectual property.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!

[matts-reign]

Some sony players that will only play their proprietary format, and probably a few more.

Wikipedia says, patent expires in 2010

[Browzer]

The Fraunhofer patents expire April 2010, at which time MP3 algorithms become public domain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3

Re:Wikipedia says, patent expires in 2010

[Frogbert]

Well I just edited the article so that the patents expired three years ago. Rejoice!

Re:Wikipedia says, patent expires in 2010

[morie]

No you didn't

The sad thing is: I checked.

Prior Art?

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFA "We have 600 licensees and we have to protect their rights, and the rights of the patent holders," he [Giustino de Sanctis] added.

Waitadurnminute. I've seen this one before..Christopher Stasheff (Warlock in Spite of Himself series) created GRIPE (Guardians of the Rights of Individuals, especially Patent Holders). Doesn't that qualify as pior art, and so shouldn't he get the mp3 license fees?

The Patent is for the Decoding Algorithm

[reporter]

w33t (978574) wrote, " This doesn't make sense to me. I mean, I guess it should, but how can one patent a format? "

The BBC report states, "Italian patents company Sisvel alleges that SanDisk refuses to pay licensing fees it needs to playback MP3 files." In other words, the Slashdot article starting this discussion is poorly worded. The issue is, in fact, the patent for the algorithm (that decodes the format, thus enabling playback), not the format itself.

Still, the cost of licensing the patent should not be a concern for the consumer -- i.e., you and me. If the licensing cost ever became too high and impacted sales of the product, then the industry would just switch to another decoding algorithm (and accompanying format). Think RAMBUS DRAM versus DDR2 SDRAM.

Re:The Patent is for the Decoding Algorithm

[Anonymous Coward]

the Slashdot article starting this discussion is poorly worded

No! I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you, just... just SHOCKED!

OK, so where is...

[MsGeek]

...the obligatory "So why don't they just use .OGG/.FLAC" comment? Oops.

Re:OK, so where is...

[Anonymous Coward]

The transition to OGG and to a lesser extent FLAC is definitely do-able.

All it needs is the support of all the major MP3 ripping groups (RNS, ITS, et al.)

OGG and FLAC as far as I've observed have not yet caught on with these groups and are mainly used by private individuals for their own music collection.

Re:OK, so where is...

[rf0]

I just don't think I could bring myself to go into a shop and ask for an OGG player without sounding like a caveman. Also what about all the existing MP3's? Converting from one lossy format to another just doesn't do anyone any good

Re:OK, so where is...

[xtracto]

just don't think I could bring myself to go into a shop and ask for an OGG player without sounding like a caveman.

You could just ask for a Vorbis player, which is the actual Audio format within the OGG container.

And about all those MP3, you would only have to re-rip and encode them from your original CD source (you DO have the original CD no?), or tell your preffered e music store to offer them as OGG instead of MP3 (some music stores already do that).

Re:OK, so where is...

[prlewis0]

tell your preffered e music store to offer them as OGG instead of MP3 (some music stores already do that)

The online music store you used to make the point that you *can* by ogg/vorbis files online is called allofmp3.com??

Sorry, but that made me chuckle... :-)

Re:OK, so where is...

[Anonymous Coward]

You could just ask for a Vorbis player

"I'm sorry sir, but you're been watching too much Dr Who." - Currys.digital

But wait, they DO

[Anonymous Coward]

"I suppose they don't have their own novel algorithm for decoding MP3. Such a thing, if it existed (which it probably cannot), would clearly dodge any patent fee claims."

If you RTA, you'll find that in fact, they claim to have both a novel method for decoding and playing the file as well as verificaiton of this fact.

mp3 sucks.

[eddy]

It's called Ogg Vorbis, is superior in quality to mp3, encodes faster, use a sane tagging system, and I'm eagerly awaiting an non-mp3 vorbis-player. Would be fucking HARDCORE.

Re:mp3 sucks.

[srn_test]

My iriver plays ogg files.

Re:mp3 sucks.

[eddy]

So does my iAudio. What's your point?

Re:mp3 sucks.

[Breetai]

My Cowon iAudio 5 plays ogg's just fine.
So put your money where your mouth is.

Re:mp3 sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm eagerly awaiting an non-mp3 vorbis-player. Would be fucking HARDCORE." ...errr, I think his point is why are you 'eagerly awaiting' a player that 'would' be fucking HARDCORE when they already exist!

Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah that. Now see if you can overcome the inertia of "whomever got here first". In the mean time the AC's argument still holds.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[Pecisk]

There are already lot of players who support Ogg and FLAC, they just are not most popular. However, for digital music players, popular != good.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not the ONLY inertia one has to overcome. There's the not inconsequential matter of all the material presently in MP3 format. Even if one has the source material, there's the little matter of time. And for what? A pissing match that's not even at the consumer level? Making either OSS idealists or "I hate IP" feel all warm and fuzzy doesn't count as a valid reason either.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[geminidomino]

There are already lot of players who support Ogg and FLAC, they just are not most popular

Are any of them sanely priced ($5-10/gb)?

If so, I'm in the market.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[geminidomino]

Sorry to self-reply, but I figured I'd head off any flames claiming I wanted the impossible (since HD-based players seem to be moving out of vogue).

I found one. All the reviews say it's got great quality and the bang for the buck is impressive (Just above $3/gb), but it's bulky and heavy (iPod fashion whores need not apply).

Neuros II 80GB for $250

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[myster0n]

If you just check which players are supported by the rockbox firmware, and then choose a player according to your budget, you won't be disappointed.
I own an iriver H320, which supported OGG out of the box (which was the reason I bought it). It was nice enough as it was, but now that I installed rockbox, I never want to go back to the original firmware.
But if you don't want to risk bricking your mp3 player (although the risk was almost non-existant with my H320), Cowon is also a good brand for sanely priced OGG players.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[J_Darnley]

The Cowon iAudio 6 I bought 3 weeks ago is great. Supports OGG Vorbis and FLAC and was 289 for the 4 GB of space. That is on the steep side but I definately think it was worth it. I may regret it later though as I probably won't be able to come back home at Christmas.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[J_Darnley]

Damn. How did I not notice the missing € symbol. That should be €289

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[Arancaytar]

Given that Ogg Vorbis is open, I am sure that a lot of good players exist for Linux, and most of them are free.

For Windows and Mac, there is iTunes, which is free and will play Ogg when provided with the right Codec (I use this).

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[FireFury03]

There's the not inconsequential matter of all the material presently in MP3 format.

This is bunk - most of the material I own was bought in Red Book format.

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[gsn]

Interesting they don't seem to be chargine people for writing open source decoders - I wonder what would happen if Sandisk only bundled its player with Rockbox which is open source.

I found out about Rockbox in one of the next iPod killer posts on /. a few weeks ago but I am already a convert. Its hard to brick your player with Rockbox. It is possible with a lot of the Rockbox players (including the Cowon players) to dual boot Rockbox and the original firmware (though the Rockbox firmware has more features video is not one of them). Its very cool to be able to customize your display completely, have search capabilities, and play doom (and other games) on my mp3 player. Yes highly recommend rockbox and cowon players (I don't work for either).

Re:Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Reality "check".

[geminidomino]

Yeah, we were talking about the standalone sort.

Does decoding use patented tech?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have yet to see an informed opinion on whether or not the DEcoding process necessarily uses any of these patents. Somewhere I heard that only one of the error correction patents is possibly involved in decoding.

Also does this story soun a bit sensational - come on... seizing product at a trade show? If you actually have a case, why not take them to court? Or would that not make the newspapers, scaring smaller companies than Sandisk into just paying the fees.

Re:Does decoding use patented tech?

[ericdano]

Sith Jobs called the Fraunhofer Society, and told them about this. To add more umpth to Sith Jobs' announcements next week.

Who says they haven't been taken to court? Perhaps these devices needed to be seized as evidence? Maybe Sansdisk was not very forthcoming. Who knows. We really don't know anything right now, but it should make for interesting stories the rest of the week.

Re:Does decoding use patented tech?

[wulfhound]

Germany's courts and officials are noted for this kind of thing. Very easy there to get somebody's show booth shut down with scant allegations of trademark or copyright infringement.

In a related story...

[benplaut]

Big Companies Cheat.

hell yeah

[illuminatedwax]

I'm actually really glad I purchased a SanDisk MP3 player now!

Re:hell yeah

[atarione]

unless they lose and have to pull the model you bought off the market and suddenly you cant get vista drivers for it next year

that said I think it was a big mistake on everyone's part to make the dominate format MP3 it would have been much better for consumers to demand (not buy) anything that didn't play OGG oh well.

Re:hell yeah

[illuminatedwax]

ahahahahahah Vista drivers. That's a good one.

But seriously, it's just a storage device; I didn't even need drivers for Windows.

Re:hell yeah

[The Benefactor]

Me too! I've got a 6GB player and it's great, long battery life and works as a mass storage device so no need for any DRM'd rubbish and proprietary players/formats etc.

Re:hell yeah

[Anonymous Coward]

I use Linux you insensitive clod.

Re:hell yeah

[PenGun]

Yeah mine comes up as /dev/sdb1 on my card reader. Just mount to use.

    PenGun
  Do What Now ??? ... Standards and Practices !

Re:hell yeah

[jar240]

Please leave your Sandisk MP3 player at the teacher's desk on your way to the principal's office!

Grandstanding Thugs.

[twitter]

IFA Show? IFA is the world's largest Consumer Electronics trade fair, the most important international exhibition for electronic entertainment, communications and ...

From the article:

SanDisk's IFA stall was left almost empty ... Giustino de Sanctis, head of Sisvel's US-based subsidiary Audio MPEG, SanDisk's refusal to purchase an MP3 licence leaves them out of step with some 600 other manufacturers and software developers. ... "We have 600 licensees and we have to protect their rights, and the rights of the patent holders,"

Protect their "right" to pay you for an audio compression algorithm by embarrassing a competitor at the show? That's some kind of protection alright.

Just use ogg.

How much money?

[Anonymous Coward]

It varies by codec. Anywhere from 10 cents to $1 per unit (MP3, incidentally, generally falls into the higher tier and is MUCH more expensive that competing formats.) If your device supports many codecs, you can expect up to around $1.50 of the production cost was codec licensing. Overall, this is NOT the big cost in production. More will have been spent on the storage medium by far.

USD15k a year about covers it

[Anonymous Coward]

See Subject

Additional: the mp3 (mpeg-1 layer3) patent expires in 2008 (1991 + 17 years)

exploitation

[Aqws]

Why should they have to be paid in order for us to get to content we already own? I couldn't care less about what few megabytes were shaved of the size of a song, if it means that the software needed to decode them can't be distributed freely. They should not be payed because paying them is the only way to get to your music, but for getting the music down to a small size at little loss of content.

Re:exploitation

[KDR_11k]

So if it only played .wav files would you buy it?

Time for a Format Change.

[lothrids]

I just have 3 letters for them. OGG. Nuff said.

Re:Time for a Format Change.

[dp_wiz]

So, did you have a script for mass conversion mp3s to oggs?

Re:Time for a Format Change.

[mh101]

Don't forget what happened when Sony tried selling a music player that didn't support MP3.

The cost

[zoeblade]

How much are proprietary format licensing fees pushing up the cost of consumer goods?

In this case, 75 cents per hardware MP3 decoder, with a minumum of $15,000 per year. Personally, I'm more worried about royalty payments' inherent incompatability with free software, seeing as you can't keep track of who's copied it to who by its very nature.

Re:The cost

[Anonymous Coward]

You are talking about www.mp3licensing.com only. Can you see from this there is another mp3 licensing authority? There prices are not known till you write to them.

Re:The cost

[Znork]

As IP licensing fees are pretty much comparable to actual outright taxes on the economy, it's time to get them reported as such and accounted for, just like VAT or any other product tax.

Once the actual cost of the IP systems is accounted for in state budgets instead of hidden away, it would be far easier to get a rational discussion about the cost and benefits of the systems.

Re:The cost

[Jeff DeMaagd]

The problem I see with that approach is that it's impossible to have complete accounting of the benefits of the patents, and it also doesn't account for the legal and developmental costs to society. All of that would still be subject to opinion and debate. Without knowing that, it's basically an unsolvable equation, too many variables, too many unknowns.

The day would come

[NaCh0]

I hate to say it but Red Hat was right to strip mp3 from their distros precisely because of this issue. The community pressure against RH was monumental. I'm surprised that they didn't cave. (even though it's easy to get 3rd party rpms) Yet, I can't tell if the huge sigh coming from the RH offices is relief or disgust from another patent mess.

--
Arizona Web Design

Re:The day would come

[Cal Paterson]

You use Red Hat as the company here, but it can pretty much be replaced with any other binary distributionl. Ubuntu and Debian are the ones I know that don't do mp3's out of the box, and I'm very sure that almost every other distro is the same.

Re:The day would come

[pembo13]

Comments any time a story about Fedora come up seem otherwise.

Re:The day would come

[und0]

But isn't now available a GStreamer mp3 decoder licensed by Fluendo?

Re:The day would come

[Cal Paterson]

Well, I never really used that. I like Debians and BSDes. :)

Congratulations!

[Travoltus]

You've just explained why technology is moving so slowly nowadays.

Did you know perpendicular recording for hard disks was developed in 1976 but is only now being implemented? It's because patent law has caused hard drive makers to sit on the technology and wait for the patent to expire before researching its implementation - which, just so you know, is long before the production phase.

Many patent holders are now stuck waiting for someone to implement their ideas, while industrialists are waiting for their patents to expire. The patent holders get no money and the technology they came up with, never makes it to market for over 20 years.

The makers of the mp3 patent, thus, took advantage of something called submarine patents. They let the technology fall into the wild, where people use their technology for a while, and then they nail them with the mp3 patent when the product goes commercial and is heavily entrenched. Also see: Unisys and GIF.

Now you have companies like Intellectual Ventures which amass zillions of patents intending to ensnare anyone who blunders into their mine field.

BTW a great deal of our economy is now engulfed in patent litigation. Fear of patent litigation is slowing a lot of innovation because practically any business model based on cutting edge work is vulnerable to a lawsuit over an infringement of an obscure or broad brushing patent.

Let me put it this way for your Conservative mind:
If Frauhoff (sp?) had enforced their patent from day one, you would not be seeing mp3's in existence now, or at any time until after the patent ran out.

Re:Congratulations!

[Anonymous Coward]

The makers of the mp3 patent, thus, took advantage of something called submarine patents. They let the technology fall into the wild, where people use their technology for a while, and then they nail them with the mp3 patent when the product goes commercial and is heavily entrenched. Also see: Unisys and GIF.

Neither of those was a submarine patent. A submarine patent is where the patent is granted and published many years after the application. What you're talking about is patent enforcement (or lack thereof) until the technology is widely adopted.

If Frauhoff (sp?) had enforced their patent from day one, you would not be seeing mp3's in existence now, or at any time until after the patent ran out.

Fraunhoffer did enforce the MP3 patent from day one. I remember back in the late 90s there were many articles about Fraunhoffer extracting royalties from manufacturers.

Re:Congratulations!

[toadlife]

"If Frauhoff (sp?) had enforced their patent from day one, you would not be seeing mp3's in existence now, or at any time until after the patent ran out."

First of all, you ovbiously didn't RTFA. This has nothing to do with Fraunhofer.

Second of all, Fraunhofer has always enforced their patent from day one. Back in ~1997, when mp3's first started to gain popularity with digital audio enthusiats, several third party encoders popped up, which were based on Fraunhofer's reference source code. Shortly after their release, Fraunhofer would contact the makers of these encoders, inform them of their patent, and ask for royalties. As a result, the encoders would suddenly disappear from the makers' websites with a message stating "Sorry, I can't distibute my encoder any more, because Fraunhofer wants royalties."

mp3 took off because it filled a need, it was the best thing available at filling that need at the time - not because of a submarine patent. Early commercial encoders, like music match jukebox and mp3pro paid royalties to Fraunhofer from day one.

If you're curious, I have a 'boneyard' of retro mp3 encoders on my site with a few of these extinct encoders.*

http://www.toadlife.net/stuff/retro_mp3_encoders/

*Please don't sue me Fraunhofer.

Re:Congratulations!

[tm2b]

I'll grant the premise that overgenerous patent grants slow technology growth (I would argue that it's because of a long term indirect cash transfer from consumers to attorneys). However, that doesn't excuse distorting reality.

You've just explained why technology is moving so slowly nowadays.

"Nowadays" implies a better previous period. Compared to exactly when? Every published expert on the advance of technology, and every study using any metric you can name, says that technology is moving faster now than ever before!

Technology seems to be doing just fine. Unfortunately, the technology attorneys are doing even better.

Re:Congratulations!

[infolib]

Did you know perpendicular recording for hard disks was developed in 1976 but is only now being implemented? It's because patent law has caused hard drive makers to sit on the technology and wait for the patent to expire before researching its implementation - which, just so you know, is long before the production phase.

But how come then, that Giant Magnetoresistance which was discovered in '88/'89 was in harddrives from a variety of manufacturers within the decade? Just because someone patented the idea of perpendicular recording (PR) doesn't mean it's ready for implementation yet. I'd rather guess that PR hasn't really been competitive until recently because there was plenty of room for improvement using in-plane magnetization (which is in general easier to achieve and stabilize than out-of-plane magnetization). Also, the wikipedia PR article says (unreferenced) that the system was considered for floppy drives in the 80ies, and this article says manufacturers started research in the "late 1980's and early 1990's"

I'm no big fan of patents, but forgive me for being skeptical until you document this specific claim.

Re:Congratulations!

[Emil S Hansen]

If you're curious, I have a 'boneyard' of retro mp3 encoders on my site with a few of these extinct encoders.* http://www.toadlife.net/stuff/retro_mp3_encoders/

Wow, that lists sure takes me back, espcieally bladeenc and 8hz. Kinda makes me feel old :)

Re:Congratulations!

[trudyscousin]

"Did you know perpendicular recording for hard disks was developed in 1976 but is only now being implemented?"

1976, eh? That's explains a lot about this thing, then.

For losing the W.C. on home turf, Germany will be

[Browzer]

Italy's bitch for the next 4 long years. Enforcing patent laws is only the beginning. Stay tunned.

Ohhh Puhleeeeeese!-Jeopardy.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I think we all agree that inventors of good ideas should be protected. But don't you think that 20 years for a term of patent is way too long? The primary argument for patents is that innovation should be rewarded - but how long does it really take to turn a profit on a great idea? 5? 10 years?"

Oh Lord. We have a varient on this theme in EVERY SINGLE DISCUSSION were IP represents a barrier to geeks getting some techno-toy (and it is a toy for the market's saturated with MP3 players, both soft and hard). Why don't we cut to the chase and simply point out two things. One some people don't like IP and there's no time limit that'll satisfy them. Two a good portion of you know diddly-squat about business (and it shows). Yes sometime it takes 5 (to borrow your limit) or more years to bring something from an idea, all the way to something one can purchase. Three be glad it's twenty years unlike what copyright offers (yeah I believe in copyright limits).

"The issue with patent law in general is that with a term of 20 years, the inventor gets 20 years of monopoly profits while the consumer gets screwed with 20 years of monopoly and price gouging."

I'm going to repeat this until it sinks into all your thick heads. IP DOESN"T mean one will earn a profit. It means you have the POTENTIAL for profit. NOT A GUARENTEE! Don't like it? Don't buy it, and come up with your own alternative. e.g. PNG, OGG.

fees

[csplinter]

"How much are proprietary format licensing fees pushing up the cost of consumer goods?"

14 dollars.

Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

Given the ubiquity of MP3, moving to OGG is probably not going to happen. 4 years is nowhere near as long as it would take an entire technogeneration to migrate away from MP3, and as MP3 becomes public domain in 4 years, just wait until then and MP3 will be just as or more "free" than OGG (public domain is "more free" than GPL, sort of).

MP3 quality is fine, and with flash memory prices in freefall, squeezing an extra 13.8% off the track size at a given quality level is going to be moot very soon, if it is not already.

Yours sincerely,
Mr. Reality Check.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Rik Sweeney]

I won't be changing any time soon though. Mainly because

• MP3 does not correctly handle gapless playback by design
• Applying Replaygain to MP3s sets the information into APEv2, which Rockbox currently doesn't understand

Yours sincerely,
fanboi

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Anonymous Coward]

Ogg is not GPL. It's got a bsd-style license so it's as free as it gets.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[ozmanjusri]

just wait until then and MP3 will be just as or more "free" than OGG (public domain is "more free" than GPL, sort of).

No, it won't be more free. The Ogg format is already as free and open as it is possible to get. From Vorbis.com:

What licensing applies to the Ogg Vorbis format?

The Ogg Vorbis specification is in the public domain. It is completely free for commercial or noncommercial use. That means that commercial developers may independently write Ogg Vorbis software which is compatible with the specification for no charge and without restrictions of any kind. However, the software packages we have developed are available under various free/open-source software licenses with varying allowances and restrictions.

There is some reference software suppied by Vorbis

What licensing applies to the included Ogg Vorbis software?

Most (but not all) of our utility software is released under the terms of the GNU GPL. The libraries and SDKs are released under our BSD-like license.

So MP3 may become AS free as Ogg, but Ogg is already available under the most liberal conditions possible. Licensing restrictions are not an excuse for not using it.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Tim C]

So MP3 may become AS free as Ogg, but Ogg is already available under the most liberal conditions possible. Licensing restrictions are not an excuse for not using it.

No, they're not - but for me, 16+GB of music in mp3 format and ~300MB in ogg is an excuse. I have a player capable of playing both, but simply don't have the time or the inclination to convert my library from mp3 to ogg.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[NurseMaximum]

MP3 will be just as or more "free" than OGG (public domain is "more free" than GPL, sort of)

To be fair, according to Xiph, the Ogg Vorbis specification is public domain - it's only the implementing code which is GPL, and once MP3's patent expires, no code will be released into the public domain - just the spec, which puts it on equal footing with Ogg.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Saurian_Overlord]

How does MP3 not handle gapless playback by design? I thought that was up to the software. I've seen many things that will play MP3s with no gaps (mostly PC software), whereas my car stereo doesn't handle it. But i have seen head units that do support gapless playback.

Please note that i'm not arguing, just looking for clarification.

Also, i thought that Replaygain uses ID3v2?

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[jimicus]

IIRC, the MP3 algorithm sets various parameters based on each individual track - so playing a track gapless will usually result in a noticeable audio artefact.

Why you couldn't just encode an entire CD as one big MP3 and then split it up, however, I don't know.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Cal Paterson]

just wait until then and MP3 will be just as or more "free" than OGG (public domain is "more free" than GPL, sort of).

"Ogg" is public domain. All the specifications are in the public domain. libogg is BSD licenced, but anyone who wants to write an EULA ogg decoder can do. The GPL stuff is just the end user tools.

Either way; there are advantages of the xiph stuff over and above quality. There are issues with the small little weird things mp3 does. Gapless playback. Limited bitrates. Sometimes it looks like we're moving away from the offical specification and towards a specification denoted by the LAME implementation. Also, as quality of audio improves, I'm not sure that mp3 scales well. With very high quality sound I find (anecdotally, I admit) that vorbis does better.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[TheRaven64]

So MP3 may become AS free as Ogg, but Ogg is already available under the most liberal conditions possible.

No they're not. Public domain is more liberal than BSD; you don't even need to include attribution with public domain.

Of course, while the patents will expire on MP3 decoders in 2010, the copyright on the decoder source will last for another 55 years or so. If anyone is using MP3 in 2065, I reserve the right to slap them.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[RAMMS EIN]

Others have already pointed out that Ogg (and Vorbis, which is what you probably meant to refer to) is already in the public domain. So I'm going to take issue with the other things in your post.

``4 years is nowhere near as long as it would take an entire technogeneration to migrate away from MP3''

It depends how compelling it is. Switching away from MP3 is not that difficult. People I know have done it in a couple of days. Not that I think switching will be compelling enough in the foreseeable future.

``Given the ubiquity of MP3, moving to OGG is probably not going to happen.''

What, exactly, do you mean by "going to happen"? Vorbis is already being used in plenty of places; various portable audio players support it, I've seen games use Vorbis for sound and music, Wikipedia uses it, Allofmp3 allows you to buy songs encoded as Vorbis (as well as FLAC, IIRC), at least on Internet TV station uses Ogg Vorbis and Theora for broadcasting. I would say Ogg Vorbis is definitely happening.

``MP3 quality is fine''

That's quite subjective. I find that MP3s, even at the de-facto standard 128 Kbps, tend to have annoying distortions.

You seem to conject that, in 4 years, MP3 will be in the public domain, removing the last reason to prefer Vorbis over it. I will offer the prediction that, in 4 years, Vorbis will have improved even further beyond what MP3 can manage, and switching will be even more compelling than it is now.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Leto-II]

Did you not read the grandparent post? He specifically said that Ogg Vorbis (as a specification) is public domain already. So when MP3 becomes public domain, it will be as open as Vorbis. As you said yourself, MP3 encoder/decoder implementations themselves will remain copyrighted. The spec will become public domain, as Vorbis already is.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Saurian_Overlord]

Unless there is some other meaning for "gapless" that i'm not understanding, i have to say that i've never noticed any artefacts using PC software. Winamp and XMMS have both always played lists seamlessly for me (and i've been using Winamp since the 1.xx days, although i can't recall for sure what gaps were like way back then). I believe it was version 3 (or was it even earlier?) that introduced crossfading--a "negative gap" if you will. I don't see how there's a problem inherrent in the algorithm if it's so often and apparently easily worked around. If i'm confusing my defenition of "gapless" for something else, please clue me in, someone. Forgive me if i'm stubbornly OT about this; i've just never heard of it before, and i'd like to be clear on it.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[jimicus]

Crossfading doesn't work very well when you're playing an album which consists of solid music from beginning to end, with arbitary track markers there more so you can jump to any particular part of the album than because there is a noticeably different track.

Marrillion's "Misplaced Childhood" album does just this, as does Crash Test Dummies, "God Shuffled His Feet" on some tracks.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

Look up there. Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's my point, flying far above your head.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Simon Garlick]

In four years MP3 and Vorbis will both be irrelevant, thanks to MPEG-4 AAC.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[FireFury03]

public domain is "more free" than GPL, sort of

Umm, except GPL covers software, not file formats - there's no reason you can't write a non-GPL OGG decoder.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Sleepy]

I'm pretty sure the OGG Vorbis people have a FAQ, which tells you OGG is NOT GPL licensed.

What keeps me from relying on OGG is the players. All my CD collection is in FLAC format and I can batch convert to any format.
Problem is, I want a OGG-capable MP3 player that is "dock compatible" with the iPod.
I'm not holding my breath for Apple to start supporting OGG - aint happening. :-/

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

It depends how compelling it is. Switching away from MP3 is not that difficult. People I know have done it in a couple of days. Not that I think switching will be compelling enough in the foreseeable future.

A standard as entrenched as MP3 I don't think will be moved in 4 years without signs of beginnings in that direction. No such signs exist.

What, exactly, do you mean by "going to happen"? Vorbis is already being used in plenty of places; various portable audio players support it, I've seen games use Vorbis for sound and music, Wikipedia uses it, Allofmp3 allows you to buy songs encoded as Vorbis (as well as FLAC, IIRC), at least on Internet TV station uses Ogg Vorbis and Theora for broadcasting. I would say Ogg Vorbis is definitely happening.

Define "going to happen". OK, Grab the current Billboard Top 40. Search any popular P2P network, get the total audio encodings of the top 40 songs. When one quarter of the returned files are in Vorbis, I'll consider it to have "happened".

That's quite subjective. I find that MP3s, even at the de-facto standard 128 Kbps, tend to have annoying distortions.

Hello? 1997? This is 2006 calling. I have some information about MP3s. The MP3 scene moved to 192kbits in 2000 and then to unconstrained VBR in 2002. I challenge you to a duel. I will take 5 CD tracks of your choosing, encode each of them in MP3 (at or below 256kbits VBR), decode it. Then OGG and decode it (you can choose the specs). I will then send you the resulting 15 WAV (44.1kHz PCM) files and see how many you can tell were MP3, which were OGG and which are original. If you're up for this, reply with the title of a CD to use, and the 5 tracks on it you want to use. I will then get the CD, perform the encodings, and send you a list of what I've done encrypted with AES256. After you've chosen which is which, I'll give you the decryption key for the file descriptors.

You seem to conject that, in 4 years, MP3 will be in the public domain, removing the last reason to prefer Vorbis over it. I will offer the prediction that, in 4 years, Vorbis will have improved even further beyond what MP3 can manage, and switching will be even more compelling than it is now.

MP3 is already considered transparent (see my pchallenge above). It is also small enough to for flash memory capacities today, so shaving off a minor amount is not necessary. If we're going to constantly shift formats for incremental benefits, there'd be no point having standards at all, and all that would happen is players would have to support many more legacy formats than there are today, and it's already a dog's breakfast of formats. There comes a time when a technology fits what you need it for more than adequately (as MP3 does), and incremental improvements should be ignored. Linus said it best: "Perfection is the worst enemy of good enough" with regards to BSD's superior codebase over Linux. Sure, you can wait to get it perfect. But while you're doing that, reality passes you by.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

I believe once MP3 is in the public domain, all the missing features will be added, all the bugs worked out and it will catch up and even leapfrog OGG, due to the larger interest group.

We'll have to wait and see. I believe the expiry of MP3 patents will result in a rebirth of MP3 as a developing beast, as every coder and his pet ninja monkey will start working on it.

- Naz.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

Umm... no.

MP3 has been "dying" since 2002. /me looks around.

Nah, I don't think so.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

1. Gapless can be done reasonably well by the player software
2. This is a problem with Rockbox, not the MP3 format
3. Any feature gap between OGG and MP3 will be addressed and closed within minutes of MP3 becoming public domain. I'd be willing to bet there are people out there with code already, just waiting for the MP3 algos to become PD.

Yours sincerely,
Mr. RC.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Per Wigren]

It isn't truly gapless, AFAIK they have to analyze the audio and find out how much at the end of the song is digital silence and start the next song there and they won't always make a right guess. LAME has a non-standard extension to the format to fix this though, basically they add an internal tag saying where the last frame the track REALLY ends, but not many players support this, especially not the ones based on the reference implementation.

IIRC, MP3-frames are 1/30 seconds but CD-frames are 1/75 seconds in duration and MP3 doesn't have sub-frame positioning like Vorbis and most other modern formats. That's why it's "non-gapless by design".

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Per Wigren]

I have a player capable of playing both, but simply don't have the time or the inclination to convert my library from mp3 to ogg.

Good. You should never convert from a lossy format to another, the sound quality will always be noticably worse than going straight to the destination format. Keep your MP3s as-is, but when you rip a new CD, rip to OGG/Vorbis instead.

Personally I archive backups of my CDs to a single FLAC with internal cuesheet for easy splitting and an embedded "cdrdao read-toc" .toc-file for easy burning complete with index-points and original CD-text. That way I can restore an EXACT copy of the original CD whenever I want. Player support for FLAC with cuesheets isn't very good yet, that's why I also have OGGs for listening.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[flink]

Why would this not work:

1. Start decoding an mp3 to raw audio into a circular buffer.
2. Buffer a few ms worth of audio.
3. Start playback using the audio in the buffer.
4. When you reach the end of the current track, move to the next track and start decoding, appending to the same buffer.
5. If the user manually switches tracks, clear the buffer and start back at 1.

I don't see how individual parameters on the mp3 file would affect anything but the decoder. I also don't understand why it would produce artefacts.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[EComni]

What, exactly, do you mean by "going to happen"? Vorbis is already being used in plenty of places; various portable audio players support it, I've seen games use Vorbis for sound and music, Wikipedia uses it, Allofmp3 allows you to buy songs encoded as Vorbis (as well as FLAC, IIRC), at least on Internet TV station uses Ogg Vorbis and Theora for broadcasting. I would say Ogg Vorbis is definitely happening.

But the two most popular players on the market, the IPod and the Zen, don't support it.

I love double standards. When a company comes out with a new "IPod killer" or "ITunes killer", everyone goes crazy about how it's destined to fail because it's not compatible with the 800 lb Gorilla that is the IPod/ITunes. However, even though it still isn't supported by the IPod or even the Zen, OGG is somehow on the up-and-up and the ubiquitous MP3 format (which most CARS have a capability of reading from CDs) is somehow doomed.

You seem to conject that, in 4 years, MP3 will be in the public domain, removing the last reason to prefer Vorbis over it. I will offer the prediction that, in 4 years, Vorbis will have improved even further beyond what MP3 can manage, and switching will be even more compelling than it is now.

Let's play the s/$/$ game!

"You seem to conject that, in 4 years, Windows will be more secure, removing the last reason to prefer Linux/OSX over it. I will offer the prediction that, in 4 years, Linux/OSX will have improved even further beyond what Windows can manage, and switching will be even more compelling than it is now."

Firefox is still losing pretty badly to Windows and a cross-platform web browser is nowhere near as restricting as a music format.

But you can believe what you want, just like Linux fanboys can continue to believe that Windows is doomed and Linux is going to make a lot of ground everytime another major Windows flaw is found. The world has shown over and over through time that a market can't and won't just change because something is better, either because 1) most people are too entrenched in what they already use and it's far too established for everyone to change in a matter of a few years or 2) most people simply don't know or care.

But don't let trifles like history, real-world examples and reality cloud your view though. It doesn't stop creationists (blatant association fallacy, I know).

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[RAMMS EIN]

``A standard as entrenched as MP3 I don't think will be moved in 4 years without signs of beginnings in that direction. No such signs exist.''

Fedora Core and {,K,X}ubuntu don't support MP3 out of the box. Apple is pushing AAC instead of MP3, and seems very successful. Somehow, many portable players nowadays support WMA, and I've seen people have quite a few WMA files on their PCs. These are definitely signs.

``Hello? 1997? This is 2006 calling. I have some information about MP3s. The MP3 scene moved to 192kbits in 2000 and then to unconstrained VBR in 2002.''

The bulk of MP3s I see are 128 Kbps. I'd say it's still the de-facto standard bitrate. Many sources seem to agree with me.

<snipped listening test challenge>

There's no need to go through all that trouble. Independent listening tests are being done by others, who are probably more qualified for it than I am (at least I can't compete in terms of experience).

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[jimicus]

The parameters aren't set in the MP3 file, the parameters are used when encoding the MP3 file. So there may be a noticeable volume change between file A and B, for example.

This should be much less of an issue with RVA, but for some reason very few players seem to support that.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

Fedora Core and {,K,X}ubuntu don't support MP3 out of the box. Apple is pushing AAC instead of MP3, and seems very successful. Somehow, many portable players nowadays support WMA, and I've seen people have quite a few WMA files on their PCs. These are definitely signs.

I do concede this point. However I think that in 4 years, unless MP3 has been pushed into an irreversible death slide, once it becomes public domain, an army of coders will descent upon it like flies on elephant droppings and close any gap between MP3 and its competing formats, eliminating the competitive advantages of those competitors. As I said, unless MP3 is already irrevocably on its deathbed, there will be no further reason to continue on the path of alternative codecs.

The bulk of MP3s I see are 128 Kbps. I'd say it's still the de-facto standard bitrate. Many sources seem to agree with me.

Not really, it is a rare occurrence indeed that I can find a song in 128 but not anything higher.

Aww I was really hoping you'd take up my challenge, as I've always wanted to conduct this. Perhaps we could do it as an open test, and get other slashdotters involved?

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[flink]

But why is that an issue unique to mp3? If you're playing an encoded CD, the volume across tracks should already be balanced. If it's a mixed playlist, then you should have normalized before you encoded. Alternatively, the player could apply (yuk) compression on output.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Reality Check,

          While your smug, down-the-nose attitude is noted, I'd like to show you where you missed the boat. Please look at Doom 3, UT2k3 or later, and many other major and independent game engines. Yep, you guessed it. From consoles to PCs, the use of OGG for its quality of sound, smaller compression, and absolutely free license has been used for several years now.

          Just because hardware MP3 player manufacturers are morons doesn't mean everyone is. Saving money on patents is good (and a great way to protest out of control IP law), and it costs no extra license to include OGG in a media player in order to future-proof it. Only a little research and perhaps a few extra transistors.

          It exists and is used in reality to save money and provide a wonderful sound tool. Guess you need to actually live up to your adopted monniker now and ditch your automatic hatred for something just because it has "fanbois". The only people more ignorant than fanbois are the people that hate what fanbois like just because fanbois like it. What a stupid reason to make an ass of yourself. +5 Insightful? More like -5 Immature Flame.

Sincerely,
Mr. No-This-Is-Reality-Thanks

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[fartymenams]

        * MP3 does not correctly handle gapless playback by design

True, but Rockbox's wiki has directions on how to do true gapless encoding using LAME.

        * Applying Replaygain to MP3s sets the information into APEv2, which Rockbox currently doesn't understand

Wrong. I use foobar2k to scan my MP3's in albumgain mode and replaygain on Rockbox WORKS.

MP3Gain (which doesn't need replaygain running to reduce the volume, because it actually changes the volume of the MP3 itself, rather than putting in a tag that reads "reduce by -10dB") does save the undo data in APEv2 tags, but that doesn't make them incompatible with Rockbox.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[fartymenams]

2. This is a problem with Rockbox, not the MP3 format

Wrong, it's the MP3 specification that's the problem. Using --nogaptags --nogap when encoding using LAME gives true gapless playback in Rockbox (and any other true gapless capable player, such as foobar 2000.)

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Anonymous Coward]

AAC has associated patents, and oggenc is still in development. Last time I looked into it, Vorbis and AAC were around the same quality, with both having their better and worse areas.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[RAMMS EIN]

``I think that in 4 years, unless MP3 has been pushed into an irreversible death slide, once it becomes public domain, an army of coders will descent upon it like flies on elephant droppings and close any gap between MP3 and its competing formats''

I think that has already happened. The quality of MP3 audio has improved enormously, thanks to the efforts of the LAME developers. However, I think (but this is really just a guess) that there are some limitations in the MP3 format that cannot be overcome without breaking compatibility. Bitrate peeling might be an example; in Vorbis, this can be supported without format changes. Can the same be done with MP3? What about more than 2 channels of sound? Perhaps there are limitations that effect the rendering of sound as well.

``Aww I was really hoping you'd take up my challenge, as I've always wanted to conduct this. Perhaps we could do it as an open test, and get other slashdotters involved?''

Well, that sounds like a good idea. Why don't you set up some infrastructure and invite all of Slashdot to join in?

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[MrNaz]

Yea, there may be limitations to the format, but I don't see bitrate peeling as being a mainstream feature that will cause *any* dent in MP3's use. Furthermore, it may even be possible. Finally, with computing power what it is, transcoding on the fly to multiple bitrates is trivial for a reasonably powerful machine. Only one machine would have to do it, and the sources could be split off and delivered by the streaming server farm.

Multi channel audio is built into any audio format by simply muxing as many streams as you want. Clever differential algorithms may be able to get bandwidth bonuses, and MP3 *does* support joint stereo AFAIK. Even if it doesn't and never could, I don't see this as a hindrant to MP3s continued dominance as THE audio playback format for the forseeable future.

WRT audio test... watch my blog (mrnaz.com) :)

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[jimicus]

Not true at all.

If track A is mainly quiet, then in the 20 seconds or so in which it mixes to track B (with the CD track mark half way through, the volume dramatically increases and remains high throughout track B, then any normalisation algorithm, looking at the tracks on their own, will bring the levels up on track A and down on track B, completely ruining the mix.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Cal Paterson]

Maybe, but I get the impression that LAME has a good enough size team at the moment. I'm not an expert, but is there really that much that can be done with mp3? I mean, if you wanted to change it drastically, why not define a totally new spec?

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it looks like you missed the GP's point. He was merely pointing out a misleading statement you made that is just flat out wrong. His post had nothing to do with, that is neither crediting nor discrediting, your overall point. Just because the point of your post may be correct (I, for the most part, agree with you) does NOT mean that every statement you made to get to your point is correct.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[noldrin]

I agree that OGG is going nowhere (even though I love the format and use it to encode things that MP3 just can't handle) but I do think that FLAC has a good chance to catching on. I've seen it used a lot outside of the open source community, and it's an improvement over MP3. FLAC has a lot of popularity with people trading bootlegs of unreleased albums and concerts. I've seen trading communities which ban MP3 because the preference towards FLAC is so high.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't use OGG because I don't want to transcode the 4GB of MP3s that I currently have.

Licensing issues or not, MP3 has already won.

Re:Dear OGG/FLAC fanboi:

[Petrushka]

FWIW, I find a 1 ms cross-fade works nicely to erase any sense of a gap between different files.

Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[Rix]

It's fine on a desktop with a high powered general purpose processor, but less so in a hardware implementation.

Re:Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, I could've sworn that my old Palm Zire 71 with Aeroplayer decodes Ogg Vorbis just fine, and it's hardly a speed demon.

Re:Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[bulliver]

It's fine on a desktop with a high powered general purpose processor, but less so in a hardware implementation.

That's bullspit fella. I have a Cowan iAudio full of Oggs and it has zero problems playing them. No jitter, no lag, no anything. Stop spreading anti-Ogg FUD...

Re:Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[Rix]

That's hardly a low end player.

Re:Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[bulliver]

That's hardly a low end player.

So what? It's hardly a "desktop with a high powered general purpose processor" either. Look man: You don't like Ogg Vorbis, fine, don't use it, but stop spreading misinformation about something you are obviously biased against. The article is about portable (MP3) music players. You contend that "Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well". Me and two others, who actually have a portable device that plays Oggs say it suits the purpose just fine. Three different players I might add.

Now maybe you had a bad experience with an Ogg player years back, maybe an Ogg player killed your brother, or maybe you're just a troll talking out of your ass. Either way, things change, technology advances, and whether you can cope with it or not, Ogg Vorbis format is perfectly suited for portable music players. Deal with it...

Re:Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[Rix]

I'm not particularily biased in either way, but you quite obviously are. Find me a $20 player that can play ogg files, then we'll talk.

Re:Ogg doesn't suit the purpose well

[bulliver]

I'm not particularily biased in either way, but you quite obviously are

No I am not biased. I have no problem with MP3 format. I have plenty of MP3s. I even have some wmas and m4as 'gasp'. I do have issues with you stating that Ogg is not ready for use in portable devices when it is. That's all I have had issue with since the beginning.

Find me a $20 player that can play ogg files, then we'll talk.

I don't want and/or need a $20 dollar player. If you want one find it yourself. Besides, did you ever think you cannot find one because there isn't a market for it? You seem to be getting the impression that I am evangelizing Oggs, I am not. I full-on understand that they are not for everyone. What I have been trying to do since my first response was tell you that your contention that Oggs are only good for desktop computers is bullshit, which it is...

Go read your first comment that I replied to again. You have drifted so far afield from that statement in your two following comments as to lose all credibility. Stop trying to misrepresent what you said.

Algorithm example

[hackwrench]

Two algorithms for generating the set: 1, 4, 9, 16,25

Common:
Dim set(1 to 5)
Algoritm1:
For I = 1 to 5
set (I)= I^2
NEXT I
Algorithm2:
set(i)=1
For I =1 to 4
set(i+1) = Set(i)+2*I +1
NEXT

SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

Hope this is a good lesson for all stupids blindly embracing and promoting low quality MP3 is the way to listen quality music. The MP3 is a marketing hype, it is the armature's music format. SanDisk, take revenge! Just say sorry and switch to Ogg and FLAC.

This is again reminds all about the advantages of open formats. Open formats are patents free, royalty free and best of the best quality. MP3 max sample rate: 48 kHz, FLAC max sample rate: 1048.57 kHz, MP3 max bit rate: 320 kbit/s, FLAC max bit rate: Infinity, as same as original.

See this comparison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_audio_c odecs.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Chaffar]

The MP3 is a marketing hype, it is the armature's music format.

Don't you mean amateur's? I didn't know what an armature is, but a rigid framework serving as a supporting inner core for clay or other soft sculpting material just doesn't seem right :)

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[jimicus]

Obviously I don't know how SanDisk make their business decisions, but I'd imagine that they'd far rather pay a licensing fee, use MP3 and produce an audio player which may have a target market slightly greater than about 1% of the population, than pay no licensing fee and reduce their target market to a few nerds on slashdot.

ICBW, IANAPD. (I am not a product designer)

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[hairyfeet]

The thing about it is the simple fact that on the cheap little earbuds that come with most mp3 players all the extra bitrate is just wasted as you're not going to hear the difference on those cheap earbuds.I bought a Sandisk 1GB mp3 player to record lectures at school(playing tunes was just a bonus).After trying everything from 64K-320K I found I honestly couldn't tell the difference on those earbuds.

Sure,I could go out and spend the bucks on fancier headphones or a high quality mp3 player,But why would I?Like most folks at school I'm just using them for a little background tuneage between classes and for that my 500 tunes encoded at 64K is just fine.I think the reason that these cheap mp3 players took off so quick is that a lot of folks don't really care about "high quality music" when they're just beebopping down the halls between classes or at the mall.I have a decent multimedia pc wired into a big honking home stereo when I care about the sound.These mp3 players are cheap,lightweight,and at least with my Sandisk cheap on batteries(17+ on one aaa)

Plus,mp3 took off at a time where 1GB was a big hard drive and napster ruled(God,I miss Audiogalaxy!)by the time the open standards codecs came along the boat done sailed.Same reason why Linux is taking so long to get going (even though it makes more sense in your average office/small business setting for security).By the time the alternative was better folks were already used to what they had which was "good enough".

So until something comes along that is different enough to warrant replacing it,Such as video players getting as cheap as audio players are now,I'm guessing that mp3 will stay "good enough" for most folks.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, Sir, armature's should be correct as amateur's.

Deeply sorry for that and thank you for pointing it out.

Original poster.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

I politely point you here: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=19576 5&cid=16042533

Ogg has no advantage for me that I can think of. Better quality? I can't tell the difference between 320kbps mp3s and WAVs (and I have trained engineer's ears and studio reference monitors). Smaller filesize? I rip to 320, does it look like I'm worried about filesizes. GPL license? Don't really care.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Builder]

The MP3 is a marketing hype, it is the armature's music format. SanDisk, take revenge! Just say sorry and switch to Ogg and FLAC.

What the hell do electric motors have to do with choice of codecs ? :D

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

Great idea! Exclusively play a format that most major online music stores do not support. Let's ignore the mp3 collections that people have amassed over the years adn who will be reluctant to spend the time and effort in converting.

That right there is a surefire way to tank the product. Ever consider becoming a CEO?

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

MP3 gathered popularity thanks to music piracy. It's small file size permitted to transfer over 56kbps Internet lines.

But now the situation is different. Now we have broadband. We have BitTorrent. Transferring a file of couple Giga bytes not an issue.

For you to record in MP3, does not matter in what quality, the manufacture has to pay MP3 encoding royalty which 4 to 5 times more expensive than MP3 playback (decoding) royalty. On top of that mp3licensing.com alone imposes the manufacturer has to agree to pay minimum USD 15,000/- per year. We still don't know how much Sisvel demands.

For you to publish your MP3 speech or song, you got to pay MP3 publishing royalty. There is no such thing that you give your work free of charge so that MP3 is free for you, you still got to pay.

This all says one thing, if you are small entrepreneur or a vocal journalist or singer, its not easy to use MP3. So, you got to pay and pay and pay. Are you paying for something superior? No, not at all. Ogg and FLAC are far more superior to MP3 in audio quality.

See the benefit of open codecs such as Ogg and FLAC. They make feasible a small entrepreneur or a singer to come to the world. They do not stop your innovations.

This is why, people should promote open codecs such as Ogg and FLAC for audio, Theora for video and Matroska for audio/video container instead of dead AVI. These advance yet high quality codecs were not there when the MP3 was born. They were invented to save you from patents. If you ever a victim of audio and video patents then you would appreciate what I'm saying. I'm a such victim. Today, SanDisk also a victim. They were killed on birth. Please explain others the importance of a Ogg, FLAC, Theora and Matroska. Ask them to use them. If lot of people use such open codecs it creates a big market. A big market based on open formats is what world need today.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

please see the reply for hairyfeet.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

FLAC max sample rate: 1048.57 kHz, MP3 max bit rate: 320 kbit/s, FLAC max bit rate: Infinity, as same as original.

FLAC sample: blah blah blah blah ba blah blah blah = damn, non of my music players support it.

MP3 sample: blah blh blah blh ba blah blh blah = cool, all of my music players support it.

Turn it up, I'm sure 99.5% of people won't miss a thing due to cheap headphones and they just
don't care.

FLAC is great but without market support you got nothin. Sure there are a few players
that support it but then who has heard of FLAC? or OGG.Vorbis?

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you completely, but you're wrong.

Open formats are patents free, royalty free and best of the best quality. MP3 max sample rate: 48 kHz, FLAC max sample rate: 1048.57 kHz, MP3 max bit rate: 320 kbit/s, FLAC max bit rate: Infinity, as same as original.

MP3s will be free, in the public domain, in 2010.

FLAC's max bitrate isn't infinite; nothing digital can be infinite. It can, however, be orders of magnatude greater than CD's bitrate (let alone MP3's and OGG's lossy compression).

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

FLAC max bit rate: Infinity, as same as original.

That's incredible. You can break the laws of physics with an open file format standard? 'course carrying around an infinite amount of data to handle even a small section of music is going to be difficult, and I'm not even going to guess about the processing power required to play it back or the battery life...

Okay, I'll stop the sarcasm. You get my point.

The page you point at suggests a sample rate maximum of 1048.57 kHz for FLAC and a possible 32 bits per sample maximum. Even saying that there are 8 channels, (The page you mention isn't clear but the http://flac.sourceforge.net/format.html states that there can be from 1 to 8 channels) this maxes out at 268.4 Mbps (1,048,570* (Hz sample rate) x 32 (Bits per sample) x 8 (channels))

Digital audio will always require a finite bit rate because of things like maximum clock speeds (For the sample rate of the audio) and quantisation levels (Which determines the number of bits per sample)

* This is what the spec. says. Apparently a limitation to do with frame headers. Still, it's about 11 times higher than what DVD-audios use.

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

FLAC max bit rate 268.4 Mbps. That is, 268.4x1024 Kbps = 274,841.6 Kbps

where as I listen to my humble MP3 at 128 Kbps.

To conserve power the upcoming Blu-ray and HD-DVD should not use Dolby TrueHD which runs at 18 Mbit/s over 8 channels, they should use MP3 :)

Re:SanDisk take revenge, switch to Ogg and FLAC

[Anonymous Coward]

FLAC max bit rate: Infinity, as same as original.

then why compress it with flac?? bitrate != quality. The point of flac is that you can have the same quality as the original but a lower bitrate (file size/play time). Not that you can have "infinite bitrate" heh

The value of proprietary formats

[DigitAl56K]

The article summary asks, "How much are proprietary format licensing fees pushing up the cost of consumer goods?".

Proprietary format licensing fees are not "pushing up" the cost of consumer goods. Consumer goods will use proprietary formats when the value to the consumer (and thus ultimately to the manufacturer) justifies paying the license fee. Without MP3 support would SanDisk be able to target such a large market? Probably not. They would save $0.75 in licensing and lose millions of dollars in sales overall.

At the end of the day it is not a "proprietary format" raising the price, it is market demand.

Re:The value of proprietary formats

[RAMMS EIN]

``Proprietary format licensing fees are not "pushing up" the cost of consumer goods. Consumer goods will use proprietary formats when the value to the consumer (and thus ultimately to the manufacturer) justifies paying the license fee. Without MP3 support would SanDisk be able to target such a large market? Probably not. They would save $0.75 in licensing and lose millions of dollars in sales overall.''

Very true. However, that's assuming that what consumers want is an _MP3_ player. If you assume they want a _music_ player, you can compare MP3 to other formats, including ones for which no royalties need be paid.

Which of these assumptions is closer to the truth? I think it's fair to say that most people don't actually care which format their music is in. Having said that, people do care about interoperability; they want the music they download from the 'net to play on their music players. I think, for most people, that music will be in MP3 format, but for some it's AAC, WMA, PCM, Vorbis, or FLAC.

As it stands now, MP3 is the common denominator format; almost all players (hardware and software) support it, and it's commonly found online. As long as it's the only format players can be depended on to support, there will be an incentive for sites to offer it. As long as it's commonly found on sites, there will be an incentive for players to support it. However, strong forces are at work to break this bind. Microsoft would rather you used the proprietary WMA format, and is pushing sites and players to support it. Apple is doing the same with AAC. Both of these offer better quality than MP3, are often combined with DRM, and require license fees to be paid. Vorbis offers better quality than the others, has a completely public specification, and requires no license fees to be paid. For some reason, it seems to be impopular with users, though. I think this is due to (lack of) marketing, and a sort of a boycott from Apple and Microsoft (the players pushed by these companies don't support Vorbis without third-party plugins).

Re:The value of proprietary formats

[Anonymous Coward]

For some reason, it seems to be impopular with users, though.

Impopular? That's unpossible!

You aren't conservative.

[DM9290]

There is nothing "conservative" about having the state enforce a monopoly. Intellectual property is a new invention. The founding father of modern free market economics/capitalism (Adam Smith) took it for granted that competetors would try to learn each others secrets and eventually imitate each other (and that this was normal). At no point did he consider that the state should actually PROTECT those secrets. This is NOT a conservative idea.

He also never considered that laborors and owners would simply throw their hands up and refuse to "invent" unless they had a state protected monopoly. He recognized that it was human nature to constantly seek new ways of making its life or work easier. And invention was inevitable.

In so far as mankind has been inventing for thousands of years without patents. How can you claim patents are "conservative"?

Adam Smith actually considered virtually all state intervention of any kind to be doomed in its effort to achieve what it set out to do and would just slow growth (which in his economic theory causes human suffering).

state protection of monopolies is the hallmark of something called NEO-LIBERALISM. So, perhaps you should get your terminology straight. For that matter Neo-conservatives should stop claiming to be conservatives as well. There is nothing conservative about big-government and unilateralism.

conservatives (I mean the real ones) believe in individual freedom and responsibility as well as minimal government involvement. This would include in taking on the responsibility of protecting your clever ideas simply by keeping your mouth shut.

A conservative would never think that someone ought to get a monopoly just because they were the first person to tell the government about their idea. The entire notion of REPORTING TO THE GOVERNMENT is absolutely anti-ethical to a true conservative. A true conservative would think that you can keep your manufacturing processes a secret for a time easily enough and if you can't turn around and make any money that way before someone else figures it out, perhaps it wasn't such a clever idea afterall.

Conservatism is not about being authoritarian and domineering or trusting the President. It is about keeping whatever worked in the past and sticking to it with only small incremental changes when necessary. In the past a person could do whatever they wanted with their PRIVATE physical property, and no lawyer or patent clerk was going to tell him otherwise.

Patents and intellectual property are legal fictions designed to keep you from being able to use your own private property how you see fit. That is not "conservative".

At the very minimum a conservative would argue that patents are a necessary evil because without patents no one would ever invent anything. (which is untrue, but if you believed such a notion at least you could still claim to be conservative). On the otherhand simply being pro-patent for no particuar reason other than "he invented it FIRST so he wins the prize of a state protected monopoly" is being quite modern in your thinking.

So if you are looking for an accurate label (most people claiming to be conservative aren't) how about calling yourself a "monopolist"?

It drives progress

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally I'm hoping for better video codecs so I hope developing them remains profitable. If the open source community wants to really attack a problem come up with superior video and audio codecs. It would benefit all and avoid the licensing fees. Also prevent groups from keeping a strangle hold on who has access to the codecs.

Re:It drives progress

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a new open-source video codec: http://dirac.sourceforge.net/

cue vorbis comments

[Anonymous Coward]

now yu're just trolling for vorbis praise from the ogglidites.

SanDisk Implements mp3 decoding functionality, but with different
library.

Is that not what you have called being " able to make it yourself " ?

Shoul one person get royalties for any laced shoe because he designed lacing system ?

Everything is a trade off.

[twitter]

It's [ogg] fine on a desktop with a high powered general purpose processor, but less so in a hardware implementation.

I've heard that before, but not seen it. What exactly is the trade off? How do people like this do it? How does ogg compare to AAC or AAC with unFairPlay? How is it that my dinky ARM Zaurus plays ogg without a problem, just like the 233 MHz PII it's roughly equivalent to? Why don't I see the difference between ogg and mp3 on any of the devices I use besides the one cheap player I own that won't play ogg? It has a reasonable battery life, but this ogg player goes for 25 hours.

Most importantly, is the performance trade off something worth paying licensing fees and putting up with extortion threats?

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[Rix]

Well, partly there's the fact that hardware mp3 decoders are very much a commodity. Its a very well understood and solved problem, where as ogg is not. Whether its worth the licensing fees or not is a moot point; an ogg only player would not be profitable to produce. Any ARM chip is going to be vastly larger than any dedicated mp3 decoder.

The real question is, is ogg support worth the extra hardware cost? The answer is no, unless you were already going to put more generalized hardware in anyway, to support something like PaysForSure. Even then, it might not be.

I wonder what will happen with ogg once the patents on the mp3 format expire. It isn't *that* much better, so it'll probably just fade away.

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[Anonymous Coward]

unFairPlay

twitter, please read this carefully. Following this advice will make Slashdot a better place for everyone, including yourself.

• As a representative of the Linux community, participate in mailing list and newsgroup discussions in a professional manner. Refrain from name-calling and use of vulgar language. Consider yourself a member of a virtual corporation with Mr. Torvalds as your Chief Executive Officer. Your words will either enhance or degrade the image the reader has of the Linux community.
• Avoid hyperbole and unsubstantiated claims at all costs. It's unprofessional and will result in unproductive discussions.
• A thoughtful, well-reasoned response to a posting will not only provide insight for your readers, but will also increase their respect for your knowledge and abilities.
• Always remember that if you insult or are disrespectful to someone, their negative experience may be shared with many others. If you do offend someone, please try to make amends.
• Focus on what Linux has to offer. There is no need to bash the competition. Linux is a good, solid product that stands on its own.
• Respect the use of other operating systems. While Linux is a wonderful platform, it does not meet everyone's needs.
• Refer to another product by its proper name. There's nothing to be gained by attempting to ridicule a company or its products by using "creative spelling". If we expect respect for Linux, we must respect other products.
• Give credit where credit is due. Linux is just the kernel. Without the efforts of people involved with the GNU project , MIT, Berkeley and others too numerous to mention, the Linux kernel would not be very useful to most people.
• Don't insist that Linux is the only answer for a particular application. Just as the Linux community cherishes the freedom that Linux provides them, Linux only solutions would deprive others of their freedom.
• There will be cases where Linux is not the answer. Be the first to recognize this and offer another solution.

From http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/docs/HOWTO/Advoca cy

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[Anonymous Coward]

What if these other products' trade names contain outright lies?

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[TheRaven64]

The Tremor codec is a BSD-licensed Vorbis decoder which uses fixed-point arithmetic (no FPU needed). It is fast enough to run on the processors found in most audio players.

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[MadJo]

I have an media-player (a cheap Korean 'Tekmax I-one-it') that also supports OGG, and I love it.

And sometimes I encounter mp3s I simply can't play with it (funny thing, incompatibility within 1 single format, some software players are also incapable of playing those mp3s)
But when I transcode those faulty mp3s to ogg, there is no problem whatsoever.

I have yet to find a single .ogg file that I cannot play with the device.

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[MadJo]

oh you mean like PlaysForSure? :)

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[mzs]

Sure it is fixed point, but the memory and stack requirements of decoding typical OGG is higher than what is needed for MP3. (Also the MIPS are higher) Plus there are so many variations to how vorbis can be encoded that you need a lot of leeway in terms of memory and MIPS to handle the cases you are most likely to encounter. Worse still there are no reference ogg vorbis files that everybody can se to see if they are compliant.

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[fartymenams]

Obligatory Rockbox plug: my iPod 5G (75MHz ARM processor, btw) plays OGG just fine w/Rockbox.

Re:Everything is a trade off.

[jb.hl.com]

Difference is, very few people use Ogg.

Easy

[XanC]

I whipped one up to mirror my FLAC collection in MP3. I'm sure this can be done better, but it works. It would be fairly trivial to modify it to convert MP3s to ogg. Slash is messing up the indenting but it still appears to be readable.

#!/usr/bin/perl

use strict;

my $flac_dir = $ARGV[0];
my $mp3_dir = $ARGV[1];

unless(-e $flac_dir && -e $mp3_dir)
{
print STDERR "This program accepts two arguments: the FLAC directory and the MP3 directory.\n";
exit;
}

my @files = `cd $flac_dir; find .|sort|grep "\.flac\$"`;

for (@files)
{
chomp;

if($_ =~ /\.\/(.+)\/(.+)\.flac$/i)
{
system(qq{mkdir -p "MP3/$1";});

my $mp3 = "$mp3_dir$1/$2.mp3";

unless(-e $mp3)
{
my $command = qq{flac -dc "$flac_dir$_" | lame -h - > "$mp3" };
system(qq{$command});
}
}
}

Re:Easy

[rf0]

Whats the sound quality like as you are going from a lossy compression to lossless so I guess you don't loose anything ?

Re:Easy

[XanC]

No, I'm going from lossless to lossy: FLAC to MP3.

I almost exclusively listen to the FLAC version, but if I need to stick a few songs on a portable or make an MP3 CD for a trip or stream from a remote location, it's nice to have the smaller MP3 version available.

By the way, I do have all the music on physical CDs I bought; this is entirely fair use. (That's pretty much the only way to get FLACs anyway.)

Re:Easy

[Anonymous Coward]

oggenc2 supports FLAC as input, you wouldn't have to script anything. And it'll transfer your tags for you.

Re:Easy

[XanC]

Well that's fine, but the original question was how to convert MP3 to Ogg. That's this script with a few tweaks. If I decide to switch my "low-bandwidth" version to Ogg, though, I'll keep that in mind. Thanks!

Re:Easy

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, I have no idea what type of music you listen to but check out Pedro's BT Tracker for lossless music (mostly FLAC).

http://btmusic.org:2710/

You need an invite but since your email isn't public I can't really help you.

us patent duration

[j1m 5n0w]

In the US, patents last for 25 years.

Isn't it 20 years?

Re:us patent duration

[VGPowerlord]

In the US, patents last for 25 years.

Isn't it 20 years?

Yes.

hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

So you maintain that propriatory codecs aren't pushing up the price because the price hike is paid by the consumer..?

And you don't see the oddity in this stance?!?

Re:hmmm...

[DigitAl56K]

No, I maintain that the technology is demanded by the consumer, therefore it is essential to incorporate the technology in devices, and licensing fees have to be paid. If you used Vorbis _instead of_ MP3 it is reasonable to assume far fewer people would buy the device. The technology licensing is not "pushing up" the price, it is an unavoidable cost factor in producing a device that satisfies consumer demand.

Sure, the Ogg Vorbis codec might be free. Now all you have to do is make the majority of consumers want Ogg in place of MP3 and you won't have to pay licensing. Good luck with that.

In my opinion, it is not "pushing up the price" if the customer would not have bought the product at a lower price if the feature had been ommitted. With respect to MP3 and PMPs, I believe this to be the case.

Re:hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

But still, the price is higher than it would have been if users had demanded, say, OGG Vorbis or FLAC. THE PRICE IS HIGHER. That was the point. Whether this is an unavoidable cost increase is the only query your point has validity in answering and that question isn't being asked. So please tell me how the price is not pushed up because people are paying more willingly for MP3 functionality? You still haven't managed that.

Note: the only reason why the MP3 is needed is because nobody knew you had to pay for it until there were a few million units out there with it (Creative, when they had a popular player were the first hit, IIRC). The cost was small enough and the potential profit anyway big enough to make the fee irrelevant to the big players coming in to the market. Remember that they would have had to either recall the million players and remove functionality or pay a royalty for these past recorders, whether they were going to continue with MP3 or not. If the cost had been known beforehand, then MP3 would not have been used at all (or only in a fragmented market with many codecs).

In another related story...

[giorgiofr]

Small business and individuals are always honest

The Wheel

[scum-e-bag]

How much would we expect to pay for a car if we had to pay intellectual property fees to the inventors of everything back to the wheel?

Come to think of it... would technology have been able to advance as quickly as it has if we were forced to pay these taxes on the wheel for the last 10,000 years?

Re:The Wheel

[CagedBear]

pay these taxes on the wheel

Sush! Don't give Microsoft or Metallica any ideas!

Re:The Wheel

[mh101]

Come to think of it... would technology have been able to advance as quickly as it has if we were forced to pay these taxes on the wheel for the last 10,000 years?

Maybe it would have advanced quicker? Perhaps someone would have gotten fed up with having to pay the "Wheel Tax" so he invented hover cars back in the 90's and released it under GPL. :)

Re:The Wheel

[theLOUDroom]

Actually, you DO have to pay to use the wheel!

Re:The Wheel

[scum-e-bag]

A hover car would no doubt have cogs, cams, door hinges, drive shafts and other such mechanical technologies. These would be patented as well, after all, they were obviously invented *after* the wheel. Royalty payments (taxes) for all of these technologies would also be required. The development process becomes so weighted down with taxes (royalty payments) that development of your hover car may very well grind to a halt... even if you hover car is a better system, ie more environmental/social/economicaly friendly, it may very well be unfeasible to develop as the taxation (royalty payments and paperwork) on development and production cause things to grind to a halt. This is a halt in human progress by monopolistic forces who wish to maintian their position. This is not a free market economy... Intellectual Property is effectively slavery of the mind.

Give unto Caesar.

[Bushido Hacks]

Yet another case where the marketing demonds have crosschecked the technology companies trying to make our lives better. And by crosscheck, I mean that in a hockey sense

It's time to throw off the gloves and start throwing back punches at these beauraucratic marketing people who keep kicking us in the shins!

fi5rst

[Anonymous Coward]

800 w/512 Megs 0f file was opened

And I thought software patents...

[ArsenneLupin]

... were defeated in European Parliament in July 7, 2005:
Software patent bill thrown out

Way to go to ignore the will of the elected representatives of the people!

Re:And I thought software patents...

[infolib]

What was defeated was the move to make software patents explicitly legal. Right now they are (IMHO) illegal under the European Patent Convention, but a rather jumbled mess of case law has built up to allow about 30'000 of them anyway.

The EPO, patent lawyers and some big companies wanted to make them really legal, but huge protests managed to turn the original proposal around to be rather against software patents. In the end, even the original proponents voted against it, and it was defeated by a wide margin.

What's brewing right now is the European Patent Litigation Agreement which would allow the European Patent Office a very strong influence in both granting and enforcing patents - no independent judgement available. In the words of the FFII

The EPLA would remove all national patent courts and put a single European-wide court in its place. However, the judges of this European-wide court would be appointed by the people who run the European Patent Office. Moreover, these judges could hold positions at the European Patent Office in parallel. Further, every six years these judges can be re-appointed if they live up to the expectations of, again, the very same people who run the European Patent Office.

EPLA puts an executive organisation in charge of running the judiciary. This is unacceptable.

No Case

[ajs318]

So, if I'm getting this right, a bunch of MP3 players (made in the far East where the relevant patents are in all probability null and void) are seized at a trade show in Germany (where the relevant patents are null and void: Germany is a member of the EU where mathematical operations are specifically excluded from patentability) are seized on the orders of an IP firm based in Italy (where the relevant patents are null and void: Italy is a member of the EU where maths is not patentable) on the grounds that they are in violation of patents?

The fact that the patents in question are null and void will hardly escape the attention of the courts. I don't know whether to expect some good arse-on-plate-handing action, or just a swift "Ting! Next, please!"

Re:No Case

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to the beauty of Government.

Germany is quite a fasco-socialist country. I can't believe I *still* live here!

Re:No Case

[infolib]

Germany is a member of the EU where mathematical operations are specifically excluded from patentability

That would indeed seem to be the reasonable interpretation of the European Patent Convention which prohibits patenting of "programs for computers". In practice, several countries have built case law where you can patent, not "a program doing X" but "a computer running a program doing X" which very much amounts to the same thing in other words. (In the same way you can't patent business models "Persons A, B and C doing Y", but often "Persons A, B and C doing Y with a computer network").

For a start you can dive into this very humorous treatment of "as such".

Re:No Case

[ajs318]

European law says very clearly: Mathematics is not patentable. And MP3 decoding is pure mathematics -- an autistic kid probably could do the calculations in his* head fast enough to imagine the sounds in real time. Anyone is allowed to do the calculations done by the patented device without paying anything to anyone. Any patents must cover a specific device -- one means to a given end, and not the end in itself. Sandisk's implementation is likely to differ so much from the reference implementation as not to constitute a breach of patent.

Sandisk should move for an annulment, since it's clear that the patents should never have been granted in the first place. And then every manufacturer who has ever paid the bogus licence fee should get together and sue the licencing authority.


*Not intending to be sexist, I just never heard of a girl diagnosed with autism .....

Re:No Case

[infolib]

European law says very clearly: Mathematics is not patentable. And MP3 decoding is pure mathematics

Well, I agree with you. But how sure can Sandisk be that the judge will buy it? Case law has a rather tricky history in this area, and EPC art. 52(2) hasn't been very well respected. Besides, Sandisk is in it for the money, not for fairness, respect for the law or the greater common good.

But yes, if this goes all the way it could be a very interesting test case. There's both a hope and a danger there.

Re:No Case

[Anonymous Coward]

AFAIK mp3 is not just based on mathematical operation but on the statistical, entirely empirical data collected from listening sessions with human test candidates.

Re:No Case

[Anonymous Coward]

AFAIK mp3 is not just based on mathematical operation but on the statistical, entirely empirical data collected from listening sessions with human test candidates.

Yes, but the patents cover the subband coding, a mathematical operation, not the psychoacoustic model.

Re:No Case

[squiggleslash]

I wonder how many people realise that the same is true in the US.

Software patents were never explicitly legalized in the US, instead a court decision ruled that a computer running a program was patentable. Algorithms are still, theoretically, unpatentable in US patent law, but the law has been, essentially, "creatively interpretted" by the courts (without being slapped down by Congress) to include pretty much anything.

So if you're relying upon EU rules about algorithms and mathematical truths to hold back the tide, you're playing a strategy that's already lost once.

Re:No Case

[Anonymous Coward]

In English we have no gender neutral plural form as we have no feminie words or conjugations. His, he, and him are the correct way to refer to an unknown person or persons, nothing sexist about it, just grammar.

Re:No Case

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Mathematics is not patentable. And MP3 decoding is pure mathematics

Yeah, but that's like saying that *insert some tangible invention here* is purely made up of elements, and these elements are protected by prior art. OK, not quite, but there is more than simply mathematics in compression. The packaging of the compressed data is an important distinction; It's not the process so much as it's the implementation.

Pure.

[eddy]

Please learn to read. Here, let me help you: NON-MP3 vorbis-player. All current players also support mp3, so you're paying the mp3-tax or at the very least strengthening their percieved stanglehold of the market.

Let's designate any DAP which doesn't play mp3s as pure. That's what I'm waiting for.

Full Vorbis (incl q < 1) and FLAC (though I personally don't see the point on a portable) + flash-mem + memory card + gapless + replaygain + good radio --> me buy.

Re:Pure.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me help you:
www.cowonamerica.com

Enjoy

Plays ogg or flac or even mp3. May not be pure in your standards (because it plays mp3's as well), but it plays nearly everything to make me happy and if it doesn't you could always load up Rockbox onto it. Hell, even your ipod can use Rockbox and play the same formats and enjoy better sound quality which Apple seems to be surpressing for some odd reason.

Can I buy a license?

[ashwinds]

Seems to me that I am paying for the same patent too many times - when I buy a mobile, an ipod, car stereo, audio system, OS......instead of all that, if I could just buy a license can I use it on all these devices. What I mean to say is that too many OEMs are buying the same license on my behalf for each of their devices. That seems like a bad deal.

Re:Can I buy a license?

[ashwinds]

Well I checked on their site FAQ: 1) Do you license mp3, mp3PRO and mp3surround software to end users? No. We license mp3/mp3PRO software and patents to developers and manufacturers of software applications and hardware devices. Huhhhh??

That's it

[Trogre]

I'm tagging this one "itoldyouso".

The writing has been on the wall for years now, and it's not going to get any better for mp3 users. Fraunhofer/Thomson have fully disclosed since day one that they hold the patents (unethical as the patent system that permitted them may be) and intend to pursue licence "breakers". Not that it matters, since much better codecs exist that aren't so encumbered.

In this day and age there's no good reason for anyone to still be using mp3.

Re:That's it

[Technician]

In this day and age there's no good reason for anyone to still be using mp3.

Except that is the universal common denominator that my CD player, DVD player, car stereo, CDEx, Winamp, and I-pod have in common. Why transcode the library into an incompatible format?

Ogg files play on only one device at home.. MP3's work everywhere. Maybe in 10 years when all my replaced electronics will supports the format, then maybe it will be time to transcode or re-rip.

Re:That's it

[the_greywolf]

...So I kept shopping until I found an MP3 player that met all of my needs, including Ogg Vorbis support. (A Samsung Yepp YP-F1X, if you're curious - I had cash, I was at the mall, and I wandered into Radio Shack. You do the math.) I actively refuse to buy products or use services which do not provide the support I demand. Simple as that. :D

Re:For losing the W.C. on home turf, Germany will

[KDR_11k]

We haven't lost the WC, it's still securely bolted down in the bathroom.

Exhibiting in Germany

[y00st]

So, license fee issues for the MP3 playback algorithm seem to the basis for Sisvel's aggressive legal actions against SanDisk. The strange thing in all this, while the issue is still in German court and hotly disputed by SanDisk, is that all SanDisk's MP3 players at the stand at IFA have already been seized by the German authorities. Earlier this year I attended the ANGA Cable (CATV) trade show in Cologne, Germany, and there the Stand of Hyunday Digital which is selling STB's was completely stripped from all STBs on display two days in a row. Allegedly because MPEG license fees had not been paid for those boxes by that company. It seems like we have a trend here to put some serious thumbscrews on manufacturers that exibit at trade shows in Germany.

Open source software for MP3 players

[shani]

Any of the players supported by Rockbox will play Vorbis formats, if you run Rockbox:

http://www.rockbox.org/

I use it on my iRiver H340, and it's pretty good.

Money buys money

[Anonymous Coward]

"We have 600 licensees and we have to protect their rights, and the rights of the patent holders," he added.

translated:

"We have 600 licensees and we have to cash in their money. We bought the patent because we had money and are utterly incapable of creating anything ourselves. We have to get as much money as we can get, as now we can still buy money with money thanks to this completely retarded patent system." he added.

Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[neoshroom]

While many still use mp3's in 2010 lossless music is starting to really catch on. Everyone has connections with a good amount more bandwidth, so downloading the much larger files isn't that much of a hassle anymore. Apples' iTunes started the trend around 2008 by heavily promoting its lossless codec and making the majority of its tracks available in it. It will even transcode from lossless to mp3 for your iPod. I have a feeling in a few more years mp3 is going to feel like tapes in respect to CD's.

Oh, and if anyone is curious about me, I work in law enforcement. I was sent back on the case of one of the most wanted time-criminals of 2010, John Titor.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[CastrTroy]

I don't think that online lossless downloads will take off anymore than DVD quality video downloads. The problem is, is that high speed is only as cheap as it is, because 90% of the people on it only use 3% of the available capacity. If everybody on high speed internet started downloading a 300 MB CD (losslessly compressed) everyday, or downloading a 4.7 GB DVD every week, then would either quickly see our bandwidth go out the window, with all the extra traffic, or see the internet providers start charging twice as much in order to keep the demand in check with supply.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice try, but if you were really from 2010 you'd know that the phone companies still haven't upgraded the phone networks, in fact, you apparently completely slept through the scandal of 2008 when it was discovered that for decades the phone companies had been taking all of the money the government had been giving them to upgrade their networks and using it to hire call girls for the executive positions.

Oh, and by the way, you're under arrest for impersonating a timecop. A transport will be by shortly to pick you up, don't bother running, we'll know where you will be having gone to.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[MBGMorden]

Until networks can be built up to handle that type of traffic. My first modem was 2400 BAUD (yes folks, that's a whopping 0.24 Kilobytes per second - even viewing a screen of text you had to sit there is see the data "flow" across the screen as it loaded). This was right around 1992 or 93. On my next upgrade a 14.4K modem seemed lighting fast - I would have never dreamed of having even my relatively slow broadband connection that I have today (1.5Mbps down, 256Kbps up). I'm sure that in 10 years when the max advertised speed is a 100Mbps connection a user that utilizes 3 to 4 Mbps of that connection for video and audio content won't really be saturating much of anything.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[GreyPoopon]

My first modem was 2400 BAUD (yes folks, that's a whopping 0.24 Kilobytes per second - even viewing a screen of text you had to sit there is see the data "flow" across the screen as it loaded).

Please insert all "one-up that" comments here. I'll start. My first model was an acoustically coupled 300 baud unit. For the young folk out there, communication was accomplished with a special box (modem) with two moulded cups on top. Starting with one of those standard classic telephones that Bell Telephone made so popular back in the 60s and 70s, you would dial the number of the receiving computer. When you heard the carrier tone, you would push the phone receiver down into the cups on top of the modem, and the two modems would talk just like humans do. The characters would appear on the screen at a rate that was slightly slower than most adults can read.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[ncc74656]

Minor nitpick:

My first modem was 2400 BAUD (yes folks, that's a whopping 0.24 Kilobytes per second

You're off by an order of magnitude. 2400 bps = 2.4 kbps.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[TeknoHog]

My first modem was 2400 BAUD (yes folks, that's a whopping 0.24 Kilobytes per second -

I think you mean 2400 bps. Baud is a completely different quantity, though the two are proportional to each other when other communication parameters are equal.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[Alan Hicks]

Here's my one-up comment. My first modem was a 2400 baud modem as well, but I used it until 2000 when I could afford a 56k modem. I'm pretty sure I was one of the very last people who's only connection to the net was 2400 baud.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[DA-MAN]

You're off by an order of magnitude. 2400 bps = 2.4 kbps.

True, but that still doesn't make the gp incorrect.

My first modem was 2400 BAUD (yes folks, that's a whopping 0.24 Kilobytes per second

See Kilobytes per second is KBps. You put kbps or kilobits per second, which is approx 1/8 of a byte. Most people just move the decimal one place over to do the conversion, as 1/8 is pretty close to 1/10.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[DA-MAN]

I think you mean 2400 bps. Baud is a completely different quantity, though the two are proportional to each other when other communication parameters are equal.

When these modems were sold there was no distinction made. My 2400 bps modem said 2400 Baud modem on it.

Just like today we use modem for cable or dsl network bridges. They don't modulate or demodulate a goddamn thing, it's just terminology.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[flibbajobber]

Actually, start bit + 8 data bits + stop bit = 10 bits, so 1/10th is entirely correct.

Re:Just came here in a time machine from 2010.

[lazybeam]

I got rid of my 2400bps modem in 1999 when I could afford a 33.6kps modem. So slightly longer than me. :) (I gave it to a friend who used it for a year, on his 386, which he really only used IRC and light email.)

When I got my 56k modem in 2001 my friends had 512k DSL. I found I (then) lived on over 5km of crappy copper which meant if I connected at v.90 it would drop out, so I had to restrict it to 33600bps anyway. :-/

Then my friends' DSL was capped to 3GB of transfers which became really tight and I got in trouble for downloading 800MB in one month on my dialup. They left that company and had no broadband for about 6 months until other companies could offer a better and cheaper service.

These days I use 1536/256kbps all by myself. :) And that's the fastest broadband I can get, without spending ridiculous amounts of money. Can't wait for ADSL2+ to be available!

Damn right

[PopeRatzo]

I've used Sandisk players now for several years and they are the most versatile player for the best price on the market. I just bought their new 8 gig flash memory model that plays video for myself and my daughter. They rock and I don't have to treat them like eggs when I ride my bike. I have had it with the misinterpretation of intellectual property killing innovation. It's time for more people to ignore stupid applications of IP. And NO COPYRIGHT OR PATENT AFTER THE INNOVATOR DIES. Period.

Re:Damn right

[Jisakiel]

I'll go killing some inventors... no copyright after innovator dies, isn't it? ;)

Have you filed your bugreport ?

[SgtChaireBourne]

If your iPod or MP3 player does not already support Ogg Vorbis, then file a bugreport for it already. Get over the fact that Vorbis is Free codec, it's got excellent sound quality and compression.

Regardless of its technical merits, the MBAs, PHBs and other suits making the players are going avoid Vorbis simply because it is free unless 1) you point out examples like the seizure of players or 2) request Ogg Vorbis explicity. You can do both by filing a bug report.

Sandisk makes mp3 players?

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't know that! Gotta check them out! ..
Talk about advertising.

Translation (was Re:My First First Post)

[SigILL]

Der Post ist hiermit beschlagnahmt. Melden Sie sich unverzüglich bei der nächsten Gestapo-Geschäftsstelle.

Translation for those who don't speak German: This post is hereby confiscated. Report to the nearest Gestapo office immediately.

Purpose of Patents

[gafisher]

"The primary argument for patents is that innovation should be rewarded . . ."

That was probably true until that freedom-loving libertarian Thomas Jefferson got his hands on the concept, but then, at least in the US, the purpose of patents became "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." [US Constitution] Jefferson's concern was that discoveries and developments might be kept secret, built into or used to produce proprietary products which would either monopolize or fragment markets without adding to the public understanding. Patents, in the US, exchanged limited control of the use of an idea for open disclosure of that idea, hopefully inspiring others to add further to the body of knowledge but at the least encouraging open review and adoption of good ideas. Anything can be reverse-engineered today (think of DVD John, for instance) so a patent is more of a time-saver than a font of understanding, but certainly someone who wants to ride on the research, development and marketing efforts someone else has put into an idea should expect to pay for that privilege, and ought to be willing to pay for it for as long as it's the best idea out there. Anyone who can do better on their own is free to do so under the patent system, as long as they don't cheat by presenting someone else's ideas as their own. SanDisk is marketing an MP3 player because MP3 is the most commercially viable format available today; therefore, IF the idea is patentable (that's the real question here) then they ought to be paying the license fees like everyone else.

never heard of a girl diagnosed with autism .....

[ALecs]

I'd be happy to introduce you to one: my sister.

Although autism is generally more prevalent in males (and there seems to be a biological reason for this) females can develop it - and typically when the do, it's BAD.

My sister's case is quite bad.

Oh - and not all autistic people are savants, either; most are completely without function.

"invisible hand"

[Ender Ryan]

All the "invisible hand" claptrap spouted by rabid "free-marketeers" makes me think they see the "free market" as some sort of religion. Indeed, most of these people hold up the "free market" higher than everything else, as something to be worshipped.

Damn tools...

Dumb question

[Anonymous Coward]

"How much are proprietary format licensing fees pushing up the cost of consumer goods?"

Usually less than the cost of hiring some folks to write a new, proprietary format which isn't compatible with anything else on the market, until you're wildly successful -- which you probably won't be if you don't have some compatibility with the standing market.

Dumb baiting question.

Workaround?

[Anomalyst]

What if the algorithm were encoded INCOMPLETELY, since it is not the math described in the patent it should be non-infringing. The player probably already has a small amount of flash memory, the consumer "enables" the player by entering the missing pieces to complete the calculation and those entries are stored in flash. Would an end user be immune to patent issues to "construct" a device for personal use?

ogg is the new mp3

[Anonymous Coward]

The mp3 licensing problems will resolv since more and more people are finding out how much better ogg is compared to mp3, both in terms of sounds quality as well as licensing issues. Many portable music players already support ogg and once the manufacturers drop mp3 support and save on mp3 licensing fees, the prices of portable music players will come down quite a bit.

OT: Response to signature

[Anonymous Coward]

*AA also includes:

AA - Alchoholics Anonymous (since the * wildcard can also mean no characters)
AAAA - American Association of Advertising Agencies
    and let's not forget
AAAAA - American Association Against Acronym Abuse

bashing Ogg

[Onymous Coward]

Obviously many people like to bash Ogg. Here are some ideas why this is the case:

• previous appreciation of MP3 causes self-identification with MP3
  
• investment in personal MP3 infrastructure demands that other answers be wrong
  
• worry at being "wrong" increases bitter backlash against I-told-you-so's
  

If you find any one of these things to be true, maybe take a moment to analyze your stance? If you find your first reaction to positive comments on Ogg to be one of anger, maybe do that analysis?

If there's anyone out there who dislikes Ogg and who isn't attached to MP3, it would be good to get your perspective. Please speak out.

It doesn't help that advocates of Ogg often have strong opinions about the values of using Ogg. But don't let another person's attitude deflect you from really thinking through Ogg's value for yourself. Having a chip-on-your-shoulder reaction is the essence of fanboyism.

The quality is comparable. The hardware/processing footprint is comparable. There are no technical downsides. (Don't correct me to tell me how Ogg is much better -- I'm understating the point for a reason.) Ogg detractors often get these points wrong. Unapologetically unresearched inaccuracy is another sign of fanboyism.

Adding Ogg to your hardware is easy enough -- there are over 100 models of portable player listed on just this page. So if you want to use Ogg, either as a manufacturer or a consumer, there's no problem. (If you want to keep using your old MP3s -- go ahead. Just file your new Ogg files alongside them.)

Unlike MP3, however, Ogg is public domain.

So, all things even, Ogg beats out MP3. So, even if Ogg weren't quite as good as MP3, it should be supported for the (lack of) licensing. You won't get shenanigans like what this article's about. You can implement your own software. You can build your own hardware without incrementing its cost by the royalties + insurance against litigation. (Well, likely you'll still be paying those for the other formats your player supports.) You can improve the format. You can distribute, sell, or stream Ogg files without liability.

The manufacturers support it and there are many communities using it. There is no reason to encode another MP3.

Ogg: highly recommended.

(Disclaimer: I personally don't use Ogg Vorbis much. My music's all lossless.)

Re:bashing Ogg

[enmane]

(Disclaimer: I personally don't use Ogg Vorbis much. My music's all lossless.

Not if your music is digital - all digital represenatations of analog sound has some loss.

Re:bashing Ogg

[Onymous Coward]

Pedantry! Now I know what my friends feel like when I mention useless technicalities. (I apologize.)

Since we're off the trail and in the bushes, all analog representations of analog sound have some loss.

There is no such thing as perfect lossless.

Instead, "lossless" has a specific meaning in audio circles that does not include "perfectly exact representation of the original signal." Referring to "lossless" as meaning that in the context of an audio technology discussion abuses the jargon. :P

Re:bashing Ogg

[enmane]

Learn to take a joke and chill out - geez. Try to relax this weekend and unwind a little...or a LOT.

ironic that the word image that I need to type in is "unwound".

Re:bashing Ogg

[Onymous Coward]

You are a complete ass.

Re:bashing Ogg

[enmane]

I see you haven't taken my advice, LMAO!

Re:bashing Ogg

[Onymous Coward]

Oh, sorry. I guess I also forget to use a smiley. ;)

Re:bashing Ogg

[enmane]

don't sweat the smiley - get laid and you will smile enough for the both of us ;)

ALAC or FLAC?

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad Apple stonewalled this royally by implementing their proprietary ALAC lossless codec in Quicktime/iTunes instead of using the defacto Free standard of FLAC.

Re:The format war has a long way to go..

[Technician]

...So I kept shopping until I found an MP3 player that met all of my needs, including Ogg Vorbis support.

Good start. Wake me up when I need to replace the living room DVD player and my car. Both play CDR's full of MP3's. I haven't found replacement products to change these common denominators. The hardware decoder for the propritory format is already paid for.

Making the change will be about as easy as converting from gasoline to compressed natural gas as the common fuel for my car, lawn mower, portable generator, camp stove, camp lantern, chain saw, weed eater, etc. They all run on gas. A couple run on gas mixed with 2 cycle oil. I can get a car conversion to run on compressed natural gas, but it will take a very long time if ever to convert completely from the liquid format to the high pressure format. MP3 to Ogg has the same mountain in the way to universal conversion. There are a few items that will run on CNG and there are some items whick will run on it, but for the rest of us, the other just works even though it has a high and rising cost. Devices and content are the easiest to find in common formats. At the moment that is gasoline and MP3's. Someday MP3's and gasoline may be hard to come by. At that time there will be format wars. Open Ogg, Open horses, propane, Flac, Diesel, WMA, electric, Atrac, Quicktime, Lead acid, Ni-MAH, Lithium, LNG, CNG, or some new format. The easy to duplicate format Ogg and horses both have issues with obtaining materials to power them and are not found in common use in homes across the world.

Pardon me while find hay to feed my horse and Ogg files from a legal store from one of the major lables.

Shell, Texaco, BP, Arco, etc do not sell hay or compressed natural gas at at station near me, and Samsung, Sandisk, Kenwood, Sony, Apple, Rio, Creative, Sanyo, Toshiba, and etc do not sell Ogg players. The above sell gasoline and MP3 capable devices.
The format war has a long way to go.

Read the fucking article

[Anonymous Coward]

Obviously I don't know how SanDisk make their business decisions, but I'd imagine that they'd far rather pay a licensing fee, use MP3 and produce an audio player which may have a target market slightly greater than about 1% of the population, than pay no licensing fee and reduce their target market to a few nerds on slashdot.

Read the fucking article:

"SanDisk is showing that its MP3 players operate a technology which is completely different from a certain audio data transmission and reception techniques that has been patented for Philips and others many years ago.

"An expert opinion from one of the founders of MP3 digital audio compression substantiates SanDisk's position. SanDisk is not infringing any patent in the pending litigation."

It's up to the courts to decide.

News flash

[Rix]

You are biased, or we wouldn't be having this conversation. You wouldn't care. You're frothing at the mouth because someone doesn't think your pet format is the best in all cases.

You lose, goodbye. Don't bother responding.

Re:News flash

[bulliver]

You are biased, or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Well then by your logic we are both biased. I don't think I am biased. I don't have an irrational feelings against MP3. You _do_ seem to have problems admiting you are wrong about Oggs.

You wouldn't care.

This is a non sequitur. I wouldn't care about what?

You're frothing at the mouth because someone doesn't think your pet format is the best in all cases.

This is funny. If I am frothing at the mouth, it is because you will not admit you are either wrong, or misspoke. You didn't say Ogg format isn't the best for all cases. I am not arguing that Ogg _is_ the best for all (or even any) cases. Ogg really has nothing to do with it, as I mentioned, I have music in all sorts of formats. Hell, I even have vinyl. I would respond exactly the same if you said _anything_ I know to be patently untrue, like say: "Toyota cars are unsuited for driving at highway speeds". It's bullshit, and I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

Let me lay it down like you're a six year old:
You wrote:
"It's fine on a desktop with a high powered general purpose processor, but less so in a hardware implementation."
I wrote:
"That's bullspit fella. I have a Cowan iAudio full of Oggs and it has zero problems playing them. No jitter, no lag, no anything."

Now: unless you are so deluded as to argue that a Cowan iAudio is a "desktop with a high powered general purpose processor" then I am afraid _you_ are wrong. Period. Exclamation point. Your later remarks about the iAudio not being 'lowend' and a '$20 player' have nothing to do with what you originally said. _You_ are trying to change the meat of your argument. I am not trying to convince you to use Oggs.

Also, don't presume to tell me not to respond. If you want to bail out and take your ball and go home than _you_ can choose not to respond

Re:News flash

[Rix]

The conversation is over. I addressed all of your points. If you did not understand them, have a grown up help you.