Slashdot Mirror
Cisco Developing Royalty Free Video Codec: Thor
An anonymous reader writes: Video codec licensing has never been great, and it's gotten even more complicated and expensive in recent years. While H.264 had a single license pool and an upper bound on yearly licensing costs, successor H.265 has two pools (so far) and no limit. Cisco has decided that this precludes the use of H.265 in open source or other free-as-in-beer software, so they've struck out on their own to create a new, royalty-free codec called Thor. They've already open-sourced the code and invited contributions.
Cisco says, "The effort is being staffed by some of the world's most foremost codec experts, including the legendary Gisle Bjøntegaard and Arild Fuldseth, both of whom have been heavy contributors to prior video codecs. We also hired patent lawyers and consultants familiar with this technology area. We created a new codec development process which would allow us to work through the long list of patents in this space, and continually evolve our codec to work around or avoid those patents."
Cisco says, "The effort is being staffed by some of the world's most foremost codec experts, including the legendary Gisle Bjøntegaard and Arild Fuldseth, both of whom have been heavy contributors to prior video codecs. We also hired patent lawyers and consultants familiar with this technology area. We created a new codec development process which would allow us to work through the long list of patents in this space, and continually evolve our codec to work around or avoid those patents."
Why couldn't they contribute to Theora since that was the entire point of it was to be a royalty free video codec.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
The Daala team has also experimented with integrating some Thor's features into Daala. It's likely that the codec developed by the IETF Internet Video Codec working group will be built from the best features of Daala, Thor and any additional contributions.
There is no way not to infringe on pretty much any kind of video compression tech by now
Unless of course you happen to own the IP rights to the video compression tech in question. Thor is built on patents Cisco owns.
Theora, based on VP3, is roughly H.263-class technology comparable to Sorenson Spark (FLV) and MPEG-4 ASP (DivX and Xvid). H.264 and VP8 are a generation ahead of it in rate/distortion performance at Internet bitrates, and Thor is intended to be a generation ahead of H.264.
You could argue everything in the world boils down to math and physics, and that ALL patents should therefore be invalid.
But honestly - if someone IS going to patent software at all, a novel *algorithm" is one of the first things that should be allowed since it's actually a specific IMPLEMENTATION of an idea. The really shitty patents are those that just patent semi-abstract ideas (which shouldn't be allowed by patent rules anyway) or obvious user interface elements (electronic TV program guides, rounded corners...)
They're working on Thor through the IETF Internet Video Codec working group and committing to royalty-free licensing for those patents. It will be difficult for Cisco to walk back from that. Many codecs make use of patents which are licensed under royalty-free terms. Baseline JPEG does, Opus does, VP8 and VP9 do.
It depends how US courts see the IBM PC compatible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and Clean room design https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... for the movement of images and sound over a server, network to an end device, user.
The problem is the US offered and court protected "codec" is turning US hardware exports into international internet toll booths for expensive codecs.
Hard to sell the next gen "internet" hardware if every user has to pay a fee just for moving their own data (movie, sound) along to their own users.
A codec tax per screen, device, user, connection would hurt global sales just for been connected.
Other nations and their broadcasters, startups will just look to other solutions that are free and will change hardware imports.
If the codec tax part is removed, hardware sales are safe globally. Who will be the first big brand to to offer new compression as a free part of ongoing hardware contracts?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Don't you mean "Thithco"? :P
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
From the summary:
We also hired patent lawyers and consultants familiar with this technology area. We created a new codec development process which would allow us to work through the long list of patents in this space, and continually evolve our codec to work around or avoid those patents.
I'm so glad that patents are doing their intended purpose of encouraging progress. Nothing fosters progress like taking a long, circuitous route instead of the straight and patently obvious one.
It all comes down to levers. Any machine made of metal or wood is a bunch of levers, arranged in some way to be useful. (Realizing that cranks and gears are simply levers that go all the way around).
If someone invents a NEW way of arranging levers to make something that does something USEFUL, they can apply for a limited-time"monopoly on that invention. If someone invents a NEW way of arranging of arranging goto statements to create a new thing that something something useful, they can similarly also apply for a patent.
Such is necessary because software is a large series of logic 'gates'. That exact same arrangement of gates can be built in C, silicon, PHP, or copper coils. A scissor is a scissor whether it's made in steel or in brass. An mpeg decoder is an mpeg decoder whether it's made in silicon or made in C - it's the same machine.
Because patents are issued by government bureaucrats, there is little incentive for the patent workers to do a good job, so we end up with bad patents, patents on "inventions" which are not new, and are not useful. That happens with "inventions" made with wood and"inventions made with C#.
The anti-patent activists have spread a misconception that "math can't be patented ", and therefore any use of math can't be patented. That's plain false. The actual text is "the laws of nature, including the laws of science and mathematics" are not patentable. In other words, you can't patent gravity, but you CAN patent an invention based on gravity, such as a new type of elevator. You can't patent magnetism, you can patent a new type of motor which uses magnetism. You can't patent multiplication, you can patent a new invention which uses multiplication to create some useful new thing (such as a better code ).
Don't forget: Cisco has an interest in everybody trying to stream hi-def video across the Internet.
No sig today...
Clean room gets around copyright. Patent is a whole other ball of wax. In particular, even if you created a design entirely on your own, if someone else beats you to the punch with a similar enough design to fall under the patent, you're still screwed.
That's why software patents are so reviled, combined with the relatively loose standards the USPTO puts towards software patents (or at least did in the past.. wasn't there some supposed reforms recently?) If I patent "icon with rounded corners," then you basically can't build any software that includes an icon with a rounded corner without running afoul of my software, even if you had no idea that I existed never mind seeing my code or copying my algorithm.
And to make things even worse, since you probably think "rounded corners" is a pretty mundane design idea (its been around for many thousands of years in the not-computer part of the world after all,) you probably aren't even going to bother with a patent search until my lawyers come knocking on your door making outrageous "damages" claims.
Cisco has a vested interest in things that use more bandwidth because it makes people buy more routers, but don't forget that Cisco also sells a load of high-end video conferencing systems. They're not just doing this to get other people to use it, they're doing it because they want to use it in their own stuff. If it's widely adopted by others, then this will mean that people will produce hardware implementations and that will reduce the CPU requirements for the products Cisco sells, making them cheaper to produce (Cisco's video conferencing stuff doesn't sell enough units to be worth an ASIC just for them - a fast enough DSP or CPU is cheaper than a custom ASIC). If it ends up in most smartphones, then that means that Cisco will be able to sell client software for their systems that runs on every phone your employees have.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Slashdot: Where a thread about Thor goes from Marvel to Stargate SG-1, without ever going near norse mythology.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News