4 ms·

You linked to the Theora page, not the Vorbis page. Also, just because Xiph says there are no other patents doesn't mean there are none. It takes an incredibl

You linked to the Theora page, not the Vorbis page. Also, just because Xiph says there are no other patents doesn't mean there are none. It takes an incredible amount of IP research in order to be confident of such a claim. Probably only Sun has done enough to make this sort of conclusion--they did an incredible amount of IP research for the development of Sun OMS. The spec, though terrible, is worth a read just for its coverage of IP-related issues. This is primarily a problem for corporate adoption: companies are scared shitless of submarine patents. Many would rather have the devil they know than the devil they don't. It's the same problem with promoting corporate use of open source software: many companies would rather have a proprietary license that makes them feel secure than even a BSD license that guarantees nothing. Even if Theora and Vorbis are both actually patent-free, the mere fear that they aren't is enough to scare many companies off.

mmastrac 17y ago
I deleted my parent comment - it's getting late and I made a whole bunch of mistakes there (as you rightly pointed out).
kevingadd 17y ago
Are you suggesting that a codec known to be patented is automatically immune to submarine patents? Or just that paying for a patent license somehow protects you from submarine patents? Because as far as I know, neither is true. Submarine patents are a threat to use of virtually any technology, unless you get some sort of protection agreement when licensing it. I think you're correct about the psychological effects, though.
- daeken 17y ago
  I may be mistaken on this (it's been some time since I've read a relevant license), but I believe that most multimedia licenses have wording to the effect of "we own (or have licensed) all of the relevant IP around this technology". In that way, if some submarine patent surfaces and is used against a licensee, they have legal recourse against the original license authority.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
icefox 17y ago
So what if a company did the research and found that there was a patent. There are various reasons why they would not announce it.

mmastrac 17y ago

I deleted my parent comment - it's getting late and I made a whole bunch of mistakes there (as you rightly pointed out).

kevingadd 17y ago

Are you suggesting that a codec known to be patented is automatically immune to submarine patents? Or just that paying for a patent license somehow protects you from submarine patents? Because as far as I know, neither is true. Submarine patents are a threat to use of virtually any technology, unless you get some sort of protection agreement when licensing it. I think you're correct about the psychological effects, though.

daeken 17y ago
I may be mistaken on this (it's been some time since I've read a relevant license), but I believe that most multimedia licenses have wording to the effect of "we own (or have licensed) all of the relevant IP around this technology". In that way, if some submarine patent surfaces and is used against a licensee, they have legal recourse against the original license authority.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

icefox 17y ago

So what if a company did the research and found that there was a patent. There are various reasons why they would not announce it.