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

MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

mpegla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 180 posts

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#41

Post by SYN_SYNACK_ACK »

whatshisface wrote: post #16
Retr0spectrum wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but why?

Patents were designed so that companies would contribute to public knowledge instead of keeping everything as a trade secret. The idea was that they would be afforded increased security for a few years, in exchange for the idea becoming public afterwards. The time range was set to be practical for the industry. The problem is, over the past few years software has been moving way too fast for the standard patent timef…

But one could argue it‘s always better to re-invent something superior and the timeframe might as well be nonexistent

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#42

Post by telesilla »

SllX wrote: post #3

An obsolete movie format, but a large amount of stored media exists in this format so ultimately a win. I would like to say something to the effect of there being just a tiny bit less rent-seeking in the world today, but I'm sure by tomorrow the seeds will be planted for millions more rent-seeking opportunities in the future.

Still used in the audio world to this day, because it has a short coding delay. This patent expiry will be good news to many.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#43

Post by merb »

muxator wrote: post #17
anabis wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most digital TV broadcasts use MPEG-2, don't they?

DVB-T2 can use a variety of codecs. From 2022 some European countries (Germany, Italy, Czech Republic, Slovakia) will pass their broadcasting system to DVB-T2 with H.265. Since January 2017 new TVs must support HEVC decoding. Sadly, no AV1...

we will see how good DVB-T2 will be... I don't think it will get critical mass and it will end up being used for LTE/next gen. I mean it's mostly a paid service, at least in germany and it will not have any benefits over next gen mobile network. at some point it's easier to merge terrestial over IP, especially if you can have IPv6 only networks, which makes some stuff simpler (multicast + mcast routing).

Also LTE next can already do everything DVB-T2 is capable of, so I doubt that without any full free plans that DVB-T2 will gain traction.

There is also a standard for mobile television called MBMS which will probably kill of any dvb-t stuff in the long term.

Edit: since we talked about a codedc. most of these services currently use H.264 and I do not think that they will migrate to H.265. Guess as soon as mobile devices ship with hardware AV1, there will be Mobile TV with AV1.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#44

Post by zanny »

whatshisface wrote: post #16
Retr0spectrum wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but why?

Patents were designed so that companies would contribute to public knowledge instead of keeping everything as a trade secret. The idea was that they would be afforded increased security for a few years, in exchange for the idea becoming public afterwards. The time range was set to be practical for the industry. The problem is, over the past few years software has been moving way too fast for the standard patent timef…

The existence of patents also was meant to create an industry for selling ideas rather than physical goods.

How often are people really inventing novel things, patenting them, and then licensing them out to other parties or selling the rights? By far the most applied use case of patents is to fabricate or buy bullshit IP to sue anyone even remotely close to your product or service into bankruptcy.

In some ways, yes, patents have created jobs. Except the job is not to be innovative or discover new things, but to manipulate and optimize your language in a patent filing to cover as much existing IP as possible that you can then harass with your patents.

It is only most obvious with software patents because of how insane it is to restrict math like that.

The question always has to be do the benefits outweigh the costs. Are the few and far between actively able to use the patent system as a means to come up with legitimately novel inventions worth all the innovation lost to corporations using patents as weapons to shut down competition and prevent innovation.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#45

Post by shawnz »

torstenvl wrote: post #15
Retr0spectrum wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm inclined to agree with you, but why?

Because patents are not intended for mathematical principles or business processes, and that's essentially all software really is. Applying mathematical principles to the implementation of business processes and calling it "business logic" shouldn't magically create a new legal status.

> patents are not intended for [...] business processes

Says who?

> that's essentially all software really is

The implementation of MPEG2 is "business logic"? I wouldn't call it that.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#46

Post by thaumasiotes »

pecg wrote: post #29
thaumasiotes wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is more algorithm than software isn’t it? What do you believe the difference is? To me, software and algorithms are the same thing.

Software is the implementation of an algorithm using a specific language and tools.

Every algorithm is in some language, which means it's software.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#47

Post by jacquesm »

pitaj wrote: post #37
Crontab wrote: post #4

This is a striking example of the need to shorten software patents; if we really must have them at all.

I'd rather the patent system be abolished than have the current patent system. Same applies to Copyright. The entire state of IP with the DMCA is just abysmal.

Be careful, you just might get what you wish for.

There definitely are major problems with the patent system and with copyright but without them there would be other problems taking the place of the ones that we have now.

Reform is the way to go, and reform - good reform anyway - is hard to get right.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#48

Post by Spooky23 »

pitaj wrote: post #37
Crontab wrote: post #4

This is a striking example of the need to shorten software patents; if we really must have them at all.

I'd rather the patent system be abolished than have the current patent system. Same applies to Copyright. The entire state of IP with the DMCA is just abysmal.

-

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#49

Post by Spooky23 »

zanny wrote: post #36
digi_owl wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And likely never will be. Newer codecs basically exist because video resolutions outpace storage space (for questionable benefits). MPEG2, much like MP3, are "good enough" for most common usage.

A megabyte saved is still a megabyte saved. An mp3 sourced from a FLAC at 320kbps is ususally indistinguishable from 128kbps Opus to me, but I can often tell the difference between that and a 128kbps mp3. I encode all my music in 128kbps Opus on my storage constrained devices for that reason.

The value of that MP3 vs FLAC is like 90% less than it was 20 years ago.

Re: MPEG-2 Patents Have Expired

#50

Post by TheDong »

shawnz wrote: post #45
torstenvl wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because patents are not intended for mathematical principles or business processes, and that's essentially all software really is. Applying mathematical principles to the implementation of business processes and calling it "business logic" shouldn't magically create a new legal status.

> patents are not intended for [...] business processes Says who? > that's essentially all software really is The implementation of MPEG2 is "business logic"? I wouldn't call it that.

The software implementation of mpeg2 is covered under copyright.

The math/algorithms/whatever are covered by patents.

I could write a totally distinct implementation of mpeg2 called "myvideoencoder" which used the same math, and the patent would make that a violation of their rights.

Math isn't patentable per numerous rulings in the past, but somehow once a computer is doing math really fast it becomes patentable.

Post reply on HN