Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Vorbis development, status & patent issues (Read 66615 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #100 –
Quote
Seriously, it took years for the JPEG patent to surface and even now, it's not clear if the patent is really valid. What more do you want?? The patent system is a big lottery, regardless of whether you're dealing with free or proprietary software. I'm sorry, but right now, there isn't much more we can do.

I could once again refer to one of the Ivan's previous messages, but I think we are just going circles here..
What I'd like to know is, does Xiph have any intention to bring more light to the issue or was your initial opinion/analysis about the US5214742 the only real thing what can be expected from Xiph regarding the claims and counter-claims about patents (and obviously that was only your individual opinion, not any official statement).

Obviously it's very much easier to convince masses of open source enthusiastics, but how do you plan to convince companies that Vorbis actually is patent free?
Juha Laaksonheimo

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #101 –
The "patent issue" is scheduled to be discussed at the Xiph.org Monthly Meeting for October.
See http://wiki.xiph.org/MonthlyMeeting. The meeting is open to the public.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #102 –
Quote
The "patent issue" is scheduled to be discussed at the Xiph.org Monthly Meeting for October.
See http://wiki.xiph.org/MonthlyMeeting. The meeting is open to the public.

Very nice. Thank you for the information!
Juha Laaksonheimo

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #103 –
It seems to me that the problem some people have with Ogg Vorbis claiming to be patent free is that there is no absolute way to prove it (regardless of the research performed). In this regard, Ogg Vorbis is really no different than any other codec available but other codecs also don't go around proclaiming themselves to be patent free.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #104 –
I'd like to add (if I may ) my interpretation of 'patent-free', derived from the FAQs from vorbis.com.

From http://www.vorbis.com/faq.psp

Quote
Ogg Vorbis is a new audio compression format. It is roughly comparable to other formats used to store and play digital music, such as MP3, VQF, AAC, and other digital audio formats. It is different from these other formats because it is completely free, open, and unpatented.


It seems that this means that Xiph.org is not patenting Ogg Vorbis, thus there will be no royalties or licensing from Xiph.org if someone or company wanted to use Ogg Vorbis.

Quote
Ogg Vorbis has been designed to completely replace all proprietary, patented audio formats.


Using the earlier quote, I assume that MP3, VQF, and AAC are patented by their respective companies while Ogg Vorbis isnt patented by Xiph.org.

Quote
If you decide to sell your music in MP3 format, you are responsible for paying Fraunhofer a percentage of each sale because you are using their patents. Vorbis is patent and license-free, so you will never need to pay anyone in order to sell, give away, or stream your own music.


Again, this refers to MP3 and its notorious licensing.  The point made is that Vorbis is not patented by Xiph.org and so using it doesnt mean you have to pay licensing, like MP3.

Quote
Epic Games (the makers of Unreal Tournament, et. al.) have used Vorbis in their games ever since releasing Unreal Tournament 2003 to compress game music without having per-game license fees sap profits from every game sold. Vorbis saves developers money by avoiding patent-license fees.


Again, a big note is made to licensing and runs parallel to the licensing of MP3 players and encoders.  Again, vorbis claims there are no licenses for people who want to use Vorbis since Xiph.org didnt patent the vorbis codec.

Quote
Vorbis' free encoders and high quality-to-filesize ratio can minimize bandwidth costs and eliminate compression licensing costs.


Quote
The benefits of a patent-free, license-free format outweigh the concerns of making money directly from the format.


Again, licensing costs (or rather, the lack of) is highlighted and this mostly results from vorbis having no patents and thus no need for licensing and making money from it.

So it seems that 'patent-free', as claimed by Xiph.org, doesnt actually mean the technology is guaranteed to not infringe on other patents, but more like Xiph.org did not place any of its own patents on the overall Vorbis codec itself, thus no need for licensing, as opposed to Fraunhofer and MP3.  Thus the 'patent-free' claim by Xiph.org and 'patent-infringement' problem seem to be two different things altogether.  Naturally patents are a concern and Xiph.org need to assure everyone that they havent infringed on anyone's patent.  But I think its a bit unfair to link the 'patent-free' claim by Xiph.org as related to infringement when it was only used to highlight the "no-licensing to Xiph.org" idea.

Just my two cents.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #105 –
Quote
Those probably do not apply to Vorbis as they all talk about using stereo coding in scalefactor bands. Patent numbers: EP0910927 and EP0910928.

You are right, they are related to scalefactor bands.

I am wondering how many intensity stereo patents are there, as there are also some by Philips (EP0599824)

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #106 –
Quote
MP3Pro and HE-AAC DO NOT have patent issues

I partially disagree. Mp3 has some patents issues (Sisvel and Philips), and unclear licensing scheme (ie not publically available) by those companies.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #107 –
Quote
The answer is simple: Yes. An accused person is innocent until proven guilty. A technology is patent free until proven to be infringing in a court of law. Since Vorbis has not been proven to be infringing on any patents (in fact, it has as yet not even been credibly accused of doing so), it is justified to say it's patent free.


Unfortunately, based on this consideration Vorbis is no more patent-free than Lame (never been sued).

I have nothing against Vorbis. I think that overall it is a good potential codec (despite a few design strangeness).
But I think that Xiph would gain a lot more credibility by publically offering an explanation about the patent situation.
Of course, you can not have knowlegde on every granted patent, but at least the ones from FhG/Thomson portfolio are publically known. An explaination about at least those ones would probably be a big boost for Vorbis corporate adoption.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #108 –
Am I being stupid or does:

Vorbis = Iraq
Haese & Valin = Weapons Inspectors & UN
Dibrom, JohnV etc. = America

"This doesn't exist until we can find it"
"I believe this exists and will believe so until it cannot be found"

5 pages of intellectual masturbation has lead me to a simple 2 line statement and counter argument?
< w o g o n e . c o m / l o l >

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #109 –
Quote
Am I being stupid or does:

Vorbis = Iraq
Haese & Valin = Weapons Inspectors & UN
Dibrom, JohnV etc. = America

"This doesn't exist until we can find it"
"I believe this exists and will believe so until it cannot be found"

5 pages of intellectual masturbation has lead me to a simple 2 line statement and counter argument?

Analogies doesn't always work.
Vital papers will demonstrate their vitality by spontaneously moving from where you left them to where you can't find them.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #110 –
Oh, it works fairly welll. Add in that "indemnifcation" FUD that apparently has passed over from the SCO imbeciles to some developers here. Sad, really.

I've never heard Xiph selling Vorbis as "non-infringing", I've only heard them say that it's _not patented_ (aka "patent-free") which is certainly true, no?

I really hate this "indemnification" idiocy. It's going to royally fuck an entire industry if it gains foothold (I don't have to tell you which corps would love for it to do just that). Where will it end? Will compression software developers "indemnify" users against dataloss due to bugs? No? Why not? WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?! <scary music>

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #111 –
If you must...

Vorbis = USA & GB
"Believe us, Vorbis is patent free, we have proof but can't show it to you." = "Believe us, Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, we have proof but can't show it to you."

And then there's the critics...

Xiph.org offers nothing but its word. That just isn't enough for a company planning its future investments. Those here who question the patent situation of Ogg Vorbis aren't out to make Ogg look bad much rather to help it. It is in our own interest that companies adopt this technology, and atm this is much hindered by the unclear patent situation. You don't have to convince the community here but companies who are potentially interested in implementing Xiph.org's work into their own products. Isn't that what the Xiph people want as well? We're fighting for the same cause, actually, Xiph's cause.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #112 –
Quote
I've never heard Xiph selling Vorbis as "non-infringing", I've only heard them say that it's _not patented_ (aka "patent-free") which is certainly true, no?

Certainly true?
The only "certainly true" thing is that Xiph is CLAIMING that Vorbis is "patent free", nothing more.

Hope they'll clarify this situation soon: it's in their interest.
Vital papers will demonstrate their vitality by spontaneously moving from where you left them to where you can't find them.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #113 –
How about if:

-1- Xiph patents Ogg Vorbis.

-2- Xiph has a contract with all "customers" stating that it will license the Vorbis codec to anyone in the world for US$0.00 per instance, for a duration of 1000 years.

-3- Connect only Xiph.org to said patent(s).  If anyone ever wishes to sue over patent infringement, they would be welcome to the entire worth of Xiph as a business entity ($0.00).  Somehow insulate principals of Xiph from any financial loss.  (Could an "LLC" concept be applied to a non-profit org?  Or is being legally "non-profit" shield enough for principals?)  Now, I guess the catch is that anyone could sue for ownership of the patent(s), and then begin charging new customers for them, but this would at least not affect existing customers.

-4- Keep Vorbis open-source to maintain the ability for anyone to improve/customize/port the software and to also proliferate the "intellectual property" involved so as to complicate anyone in the future from "locking down" Vorbis (since thousands of users would have their own source, could create their own codec versions, as long as they don't "distribute" them, at least officially).  This would hopefully alleviate the caveat descibed at the end of item -3-, if not prevent it in many cases (companies saying "sheesh...too much work...like trying to kill ants...too much financial risk to sue...just let them have it.")

Now, this would obviously not address the issue of some other company/entity coming along and saying, "Hey, we have a patent of part of your technology."  If they do, see -3- (and -4-, as well).

No one else can patent Vorbis-specific technology, because there would be a patent holder already.

No company could ever complain that "there are license fees for Vorbis", because there wouldn't be, and there would be a contract to clearly support it, one that would not expire in any reasonable length of time.

Xiph changes their marketing claim from "Vorbis is patent-free" (or whatever it says now) to "Vorbis is free, guaranteed."  Proof is the patent(s) along with the contract to all interested "buyers".

----------

So?  Am I nuts/uninformed/naive?

If this were done, would it address anyone's issues with Xiph's current marketing strategy for Vorbis?

Any part of it not doable?  If so, can the idea be fixed in order to work?

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #114 –
Quote
-1- Xiph patents Ogg Vorbis.


Well, they can't patent "Ogg Vorbis" as a whole, because Ogg Vorbis is a set of algorithms and many of these are either already patented (MDCT with window switching with overlap/add) or are not patented but in widespread use in algorithms like TwinVQ, WMA and such.

Xiph could patent some of the algorithms in Vorbis that are not prior-art, and that is purely a business decision of Xiph.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #115 –
The scary part about the way this discussion is that that I'm drawing analogies of:

Vorbis -> Linux
"Prove it that Vorbis is patent free!" -> "Prove it that Linux doesn't infringe on any intellectual property!"

I don't think I want to go on with analogies to SCO and Microsoft...

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #116 –
Quote
I really hate this "indemnification" idiocy. It's going to royally fuck an entire industry if it gains foothold (I don't have to tell you which corps would love for it to do just that). Where will it end? Will compression software developers "indemnify" users against dataloss due to bugs? No? Why not? WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?! <scary music>

It may seem to idiocy to you, but swearing doesn't exactly prove your point. You have to remember that corporations have more to loose than hobbyists. Usually, while individuals get a Cease & Desist letter, corporations get sued. So in cost/benefit, is it better to pay some (reasonable) fees to MPEG-LA or risk paying a truckload of money in case someone sues you? If the license fees are dwarfed by your other investments, "patent-free"

And yes, if someone sells you a defective product, and you lose money due to these defects, you can sue them. IANAL but in this sense, the type of the product shouldn't matter.

<conspiracy mode>
Maybe the reason why the patent searches aren't disclosed is that they found unavoidable patent issues?
</conspiracy mode>

I'm just playing the devil's advocate - I'd love to see the legal issues of Vorbis solved

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #117 –
Quote
The scary part about the way this discussion is that that I'm drawing analogies of:

Vorbis -> Linux
"Prove it that Vorbis is patent free!" -> "Prove it that Linux doesn't infringe on any intellectual property!"

I don't think I want to go on with analogies to SCO and Microsoft...


This is simply not true - the fact is that Xiph Org is the organisation which uses "patent free" as a key marketing argument - and, yet, they don't show any proof that they even did a patent search (see Jack's claim that they can't disclose who did the search)

Nobody here compares Ogg to Linux - the fact is, that everbody is just concerned with some claim that doesn't have any proof or, at least,  sign of good will to reduce the doubt.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #118 –
The fact is - no company, encluding Thomson, Philips, Dolby, Sony, FhG IIS, Nokia, AT&T, CT has no guts to claim that their compression systems are free of third-party "submarine" patents  and, yet,  one small organisation  called Xiph  comes with a claim that their complete coding system is patent free - and that becomes a marketing claim

Ok, this might be true - in fact, I would like to believe that it is true - but they were presented with some patents that might be of their concern, and  I think it is fair enough to expect a reply from Xiph when these patents are in concern.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #119 –
Quote
Xiph could patent some of the algorithms in Vorbis that are not prior-art, and that is purely a business decision of Xiph.

Then that, as a start anyway.

If Xiph could at least have one or two patents to point to, and then guarantee the codec as free by an associated contract, then that would substantiate claims of being "free, guaranteed".  Drop "patent-free" since it stinks to so many people (and rightly so, IMO).  "Free, guaranteed" would speak just as strongly to any company wanting to use or invest in the Vorbis codec in any capacity.  More strongly even.

As for anyone being able, now or someday, to sue Xiph over infringement of any other patent, all that proves is that Xiph is bound by the laws of probability when dealing with seemingly well-defined but nebulously enforcable laws.  They'd be in the exact same boat as every other business (whether profit or not-for-profit) concerning the "likelihood of being sued".  No way around that one, probably.

As long as they could support their marketing claim, the rest is elementary.  "Patent-free" seems to be the giant cause of heatburn.  I'm just trying to completely disarm that concept by proposing a solution that would replace something seemingly "not-provable" ("patent-free") with something easily provable ("free, guaranteed").  Or better yet, how about "free, guaranteed and protected"?

I think once you have at least one patent and a contract to point to it as a viable product, then you could strengthen the hell out of the marketing statement.

"Free, guaranteed and protected for a millenia"

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #120 –
Quote
Free, guaranteed and protected for a millenia


Actually, all of audio coding patents will definitely expire after 20 years, so even the awful-patent-protected-not-free-not-GPL-yada-yada MP3 will be free of any patent fees

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #121 –
Quote
Quote
Free, guaranteed and protected for a millenia


Actually, all of audio coding patents will definitely expire after 20 years, so even the awful-patent-protected-not-free-not-GPL-yada-yada MP3 will be free of any patent fees 

True, indeed, but someone else will come along and stick a different name on something "remarkably" similar, or find some other way to use patent law to their advantage.  It seems that patent law is one of the "holiest" concepts in legal history ("holiest" = "many holes", not "sacred").

[analogy revival]
If patent law were a boat, it would have millions of holes, and no single person would know specifically of the existance of more than one thousand of them, nor would anyone have any idea how many holes ever actually existed.
[/analogy revival]

Hence enabling exploitation by anyone.

I'm not challenging patent law.  No solution for it.  No way to make yourself "un-sue-able".

The main point of my argument is for Xiph to drop "patent-free" since it looks to be an unsupportable statement (or at least not-supported-enough-to-make-people-happy).

They should use something supportable, and only after being able to support it.  Simple concept, not-so-simple solution, but one I begin trying to define in my first post.

BTW, thx for the input...my idea is just a brainstorm in great need of either refinement or debunking.


Edit:  Oh yeah...about MP3 being patent-free after 20 years...not much lasts over 20 years in IT anyway.  MP3 will surely not be the popular codec of choice in 2023.  By then, it will be something else...likely with a patent and a cost attached to it!  Unless someone...oh, I don't know, patents something to prevent  anyone else from infringing and making money on it, then gives it away to the world for free, supported by a contract to that effect. 

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #122 –
Quote
If Xiph could at least have one or two patents to point to,


For any method that Xiph is using which *could* be patented, the very fact that they are doing it publicly will establish prior art and prevent anyone else from patenting the same method.  edit: Thus they will be protected in using that method

That's the theory anyway.. in practice a lot of patents seem to get granted where there is prior art that just didn't show up in the process.  Those patents are ripe to be invalidated, but it costs a lot to get lawyers to do even simple things.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #123 –
Quote
MP3 will surely not be the popular codec of choice in 2023.

Mp3 patents should expire sooner than 2023 (2010 or 2012 IIRC) 
Vital papers will demonstrate their vitality by spontaneously moving from where you left them to where you can't find them.

Vorbis development, status & patent issues

Reply #124 –
Quote
Edit: Oh yeah...about MP3 being patent-free after 20 years...not much lasts over 20 years in IT anyway. MP3 will surely not be the popular codec of choice in 2023. By then, it will be something else...likely with a patent and a cost attached to it! Unless someone...oh, I don't know, patents something to prevent anyone else from infringing and making money on it, then gives it away to the world for free, supported by a contract to that effect. 


Going a little bit off topic here, most MP3 patents were filled in 1992 and some in 1996, so they will expire by 2012 and 2016 respectively. 

OTOH,  MPEG-2 video was standardized in 1994 - based on MPEG-1/H.261 standardized in 1990, and after almost 10 years (actually, 13 if we take the older version in the count) it is still in full-use by DVDs, and I think it will stay for at least 10 years in that industry