Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mpeg 7 To Include Per-Frame Content Identification

Posted by timothy on from the you're-watching-us-and-vice-versa dept.

An anonymous reader writes "NEC has announced that its video content identification technology has been incorporated in the upcoming Mpeg 7 video standard, allowing for each video frame to have its own signature, meaning that even minute changes to the file such as adding subtitles, watermarks or dogtags, and of course cutting out adverts, will alter the overall signature of the video. According to NEC this will allow the owners of the video to automatically 'detect illegal copies' and 'prevent illegal upload of video content' without their consent. NEC also claims that its technology will do away with the current manual checking by members of the movie industry and ISPs to spot dodgy videos."

3 of 273 comments (clear)

  1. How it works by scdeimos · · Score: 5, Informative

    For the technically curious, there's a high-level overview of the technology in an NEC media release here:

    http://www.nec.com.au/News-Media/Media-Centre/Media-Releases/NEC-Develops-Video-Content-Identification-Technology-that-Detects-Illegal-Video-Copies-on-the-Internet-in-a-Matter-of-Seconds.html

  2. Re:First of all.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah, this is pretty hilarious, also your comment is a bit misinformed, but I don't really blame you for that, so here's the low down...

    MPEG-7 is a content description standard - that is, it can be used with MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 (which includes h.264 quite notably...) to add metadata to the data streams.

    Okay, so now we're talking about an NEC extension to MPEG-7 that they're trying to sell - even though MPEG-7 is largely unused right now. Also, notice I say unused now, implying the standard is done. That's because it is done. MPEG-7 isn't "going" to contain anything - it already exists! This is just an extension to it being proposed by someone who has a new patent and wants to get in the patent pool doubtless.

    Okay, now to address your comment. MPEG has nothing to do with patents or licensing. MPEG = Motion Picture Experts Group, they help design and create video standards, and they're very intelligent people. The people you want to be mad at is MPEG-LA - no relation to MPEG whatsoever except their name. MPEG-LA creates patent pools for "essential" patents and then license them to implementors, distributors, and anyone who they can convince people needs them. MPEG-LA is pretty bad, but compared to some other patent people (look at Via's licensing for AAC...) they're not so bad - first 100,000 units sold don't have to pay royalties, any freely distributed videos don't have to pay royalties. Not saying they're good, but they're just not quite as bad as everyone else out there doing patent enforcement...

    So please, don't blame the kind people a MPEG for MPEG-LA. Blame MPEG-LA themselves, http://mpegla.com/

    Sincerely,
    Your friendly codec developer/implementer

  3. Re:modest proposal by andi75 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you believe you have only the right to do the things worded in the unreadable legalese you have already successfully been brainwashed.

    If you buy a movie, you get to watch/mutilate/ignore the movie. On your terms. The movie is protected by copyright, which is ment to govern *redistribution* of said movie (wholesale or in parts), and nothing else. What you're doing with it is 100% your choice.