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

151–160 of 291 posts

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

#151

Post by djsumdog »

voltagex_ wrote: post #125
TD-Linux wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How do I "choose" ALAC? I thought only select albums were available losslessly. Support Bandcamp. Support Databeats (storefront for many drum 'n' bass labels). Hell, support Beatport and Juno, even though they insist on huge markups for WAV/FLAC.

I'm glad Bandcamp and even CDBaby support FLAC for the same price. I feel like it's the best format for balancing quality vs size, and it's more open than ALAC.

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

#152

Post by djsumdog »

voltagex_ wrote: post #125
TD-Linux wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How do I "choose" ALAC? I thought only select albums were available losslessly. Support Bandcamp. Support Databeats (storefront for many drum 'n' bass labels). Hell, support Beatport and Juno, even though they insist on huge markups for WAV/FLAC.

I'm glad Bandcamp and even CDBaby support FLAC for the same price. I feel like it's the best format for balancing quality vs size, and it's more open than ALAC.

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

#156

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway91111 wrote: post #97
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.

Do you suggest I don't listen to music, or are you prepared with an alternative to apple?

[deleted]

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

#157

Post by chc »

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…

Software patents aren't particularly useful for making money with software. Hackers produce code, which is protected by copyright, and that's how the law protects them from having their work stolen. Patents are a bad match for software, and are mainly used for two things:

1. Trolls use them to seek rent from independent creations.

2. Companies that are not purely trolls but need a vector to attack another company sometimes use them in the same way trolls do.

3. Entities that actually make software use them as a deterrent against patent claims.

Nobody actually depends on them for the profitability of software they've made, and nobody actually benefits from the disclosures in expired patents. Software patents are purely weapons. The hypothetical genius you're talking about would not be harmed at all if they went away, and would be better off because they'd be spared the vicissitudes of patent trolls' attention.

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

#158

Post by toast0 »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #143
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.

The major trouble with patents, and the thing that puts them in a special category of nuisance all of their own, is that it's fundamentally impossible to know that a thing is unencumbered until each particular claim to the contrary has been hashed out in court, at ruinous expense. And there is no legal proscription against patent owners letting you think you were safe for years, and then popping up to cream off the f…

Can't we take winamp's initial release from April 21, 1997, add 1 year for late filing, and say anything it did is unencumbered by April 21, 2017? (Let's ignore patents filed before June 8, 1995 and issued later, since we're approaching the end of those, I hope)

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

#159

Post by dahauns »

a3n wrote: post #95
khedoros1 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The loom? Sure. The exact pattern on the cards themselves? Maybe not. I'd say no, but I recognize that US law currently says differently. It seems like the old pattern of "Patent a certain method of weaving brocade", then later "Patent a certain method of weaving brocade...on (mechanical) computers!"

The exact pattern on the cards would seem to be a copyright issue more than a patent issue. To the original objection that you can't patent math, I think some countries do disallow software patents, don't know if it's that reason or something else. But if they can disallow because math, shouldn't they disallow all patents because physics?

You're on to something here - physics vs math as a demarcation line is actually a thing:

German patent law for example has had the term "Technizität" as a neccessary property for a patent to be valid.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technizit%C3%A4t

Money quote from the BGH (German Supreme Court): "Als patentierbar anzusehen ist eine Lehre zum planmäßigen Handeln unter Einsatz beherrschbarer Naturkräfte zur Erreichung eines kausal übersehbaren Erfolges." (GTrans:"To be considered patentable is a doctrine of planned action using controllable natural forces to achieve a causally overlookable success." :) )

i.e. You gotta use physics in your patent.

I have been coming back to this time and again, and today I still see it as the least shitty definition in regard to what should be patentable and what shouldn't.

Other national patent offices in Europe have used similar demarcation properties and it had served them quite well...until the degradation of patent standards started here as well around the turn of the millenium, with the first act being the EPO starting to issue software patents in rather blatant violation of its mandate.

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

#160

Post by Xeoncross »

djsumdog wrote: post #148
JulianMorrison wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The major trouble with patents, and the thing that puts them in a special category of nuisance all of their own, is that it's fundamentally impossible to know that a thing is unencumbered until each particular claim to the contrary has been hashed out in court, at ruinous expense. And there is no legal proscription against patent owners letting you think you were safe for years, and then popping up to cream off the f…

I'm really glad New Zealand decided to disallow software patents. I wish more countries would follow suit.

Has any action been taken against them by other countries or even private industries for this?
Post reply on HN