Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

iis.fraunhofer.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 291 posts

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#101

Post by floatboth »

yuhong wrote: post #71
_delirium wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roughly in the way the "Burn All GIFs" [1] campaign became obsolete: the patents expired, removing the original objection, but nonetheless alternative formats are now better anyway. [1] http://burnallgifs.org/archives/

PNG ended up being supported better than Vorbis/Opus though.

Sure, PNG instantly took over as the lossless non-animated format, but Animated PNG is still not widely supported (Firefox only IIRC?)

Mostly the "auto-playing animations without audio" stuff is moving to videos, e.g. https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2016/07/autoplay

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#102

Post by vkou »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #91
vkou wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument for why software patents are different is premised by why patents exist. They exist to grant someone a monopoly in exchange for them sharing their invention with the world. If I patent a dishwasher that does not clog, I will be rewarded for my invention... But once the patent expires, a skilled engineer will be able to look at my patent, and build a dishwasher that does not clog - in far less time then i…

With your ideas about patents someone should do it out of the kindness of their heart I guess. Is that what has driven most technological advancements of the human race? In your software-patentless world, why would a genius choose to work in software as opposed to another field inventing patentable tangible objects where he or she will be monetarily rewarded for it and able to make a living? Don't say you are already…

No, you get a patent for your secret anti-clog dishwasher, so that the courts grant you a monopoly on it. In exchange, you have to give something back - specifically, you have to reveal your secret design to society - so that it is useful to someone in the future. That's the contract that you agree to, when you patent something.

If you don't want to reveal your design, you could always keep it a trade secret.

If you're a genius working on software, you shouldn't have trouble filing a patent that would be useful to another engineer, once it expires. For some reason, though, people instead patent stupid shit like 'a software system that does _______.' They don't actually explain how to build a software system that does _____, they don't give anything back to society, and are instead leeching of the largess of our legal system.

If you want protection for your invention, tell us how it works. It's a pretty simple concept.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#103

Post by selectodude »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #98
alerighi wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So don't buy music from Apple, or from anyone else that sells it in non-free formats

Do you have a suggestion? Where can I find Rihanna in Ogg/Vorbis?

Spotify uses Ogg Vorbis.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#104

Post by ryukafalz »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #98
alerighi wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So don't buy music from Apple, or from anyone else that sells it in non-free formats

Do you have a suggestion? Where can I find Rihanna in Ogg/Vorbis?

The simplest thing, IMO, is just to buy your music on CD and rip it to a free format yourself. Some indie artists release their work online in free formats, but for mainstream artists a physical copy is often the only way.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#105

Post by TD-Linux »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #67
TD-Linux wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not believing in software patents is unlikely to change a court's mind. Instead, support formats that are royalty free from the start - Vorbis, Opus, and Codec2, for example.

How do you "support a format"? AFAIK nothing will convince Apple to release music in a better (patent-free) codec, much less convince others to dump DRM.

If buying from iTunes, you can choose ALAC, which is royalty free.

Patent-encumbered audio codecs are popular at this point because of network effects, not technical superiority. There are many ways to reduce the network effect, even without changing music buying habits. For example If you're a website designer, include a royalty-free audio format as one of your srcs. As a bonus, you'll save some bandwidth.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#106

Post by vkou »

wbl wrote: post #86
vkou wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument for why software patents are different is premised by why patents exist. They exist to grant someone a monopoly in exchange for them sharing their invention with the world. If I patent a dishwasher that does not clog, I will be rewarded for my invention... But once the patent expires, a skilled engineer will be able to look at my patent, and build a dishwasher that does not clog - in far less time then i…

Not true for compression patents.

Not all software patents are alike. Some of them actually demonstrate an original, complicated, novel, non-obvious technique, in sufficient fidelity that an engineer, looking at the patent filing can reproduce the secret design, with far less effort then it would take them to do so without the patent. That is an example of the patent providing benefit to society - that merits society providing it with legal protection.

Most don't, though.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#107

Post by poizan42 »

yuhong wrote: post #80
poizan42 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think 5,703,999 is about shifting between using joint and separated stereo for frames depending on the amount of difference between the channels to avoid cross-channel interference, this sounds like it might still be important for lower bitrate mp3s. I don't think I know the technical details well enough to comment on 5,924,060, but I'll note that it has a priority date of 1986 and publication date of 1999... good…

In any case, it is 17 years after publication or 20 years after filing (before 1995), meaning that both are expired.

So the Tunequest[0] article referenced got it wrong on the last two? I have a hard time figuring out what applies and does not apply to patents filed between 1995 and 1999

[0]: http://www.tunequest.org/a-big-list-of-mp3-patents/20070226/

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#108

Post by sbov »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #89
2bluesc wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you "support a format"? AFAIK nothing will convince Apple to release music in a better (patent-free) codec, much less convince others to dump DRM. Then you start by not giving them your money. It's a uphill battle, but someone has to fight the good fight instead of just throwing their hands-up.

> someone has to fight the good fight That's a noble, if politically naïve, attitude. Societies, like Congress, have a limited bandwidth for problem solving. The way we prioritize what gets solved and what doesn't, as well as how to solve it, is "politics". (This is more a matter of definition than quibbling.) There are various political institutions, and individuals have varying degrees of influence over them, depen…

There's a wide range here. Complaining on a message board where most people agree with you is basically zero effort. Devoting your life's work to it is a ton of effort. There is a middle ground here.

My general thought is: you should, on a regular basis, feel at least a little bit of pain due to your opinions. If you don't then your opinion is probably worthless to society.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#109

Post by microwavecamera »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #98
alerighi wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So don't buy music from Apple, or from anyone else that sells it in non-free formats

Do you have a suggestion? Where can I find Rihanna in Ogg/Vorbis?

Rihanna? Well that's your first problem.

Re: The licensing program for MP3-related patents has been terminated

#110

Post by alexbeloi »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #67
TD-Linux wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not believing in software patents is unlikely to change a court's mind. Instead, support formats that are royalty free from the start - Vorbis, Opus, and Codec2, for example.

How do you "support a format"? AFAIK nothing will convince Apple to release music in a better (patent-free) codec, much less convince others to dump DRM.

As an engineer? You can influence design decisions and standards for the products your company makes.

Somebody at apple decided AAC was better than MP3 because of it has better licensing for distributors, they could have gone further to consider codecs which had liberal licensing towards codec developers/manufacturers.

Post reply on HN