Streaming Patent Buoys RealNetworks 133
rishimathew writes writes to tell us The New York Times is reporting that RealNetworks recently received a patent for a specific way to stream multimedia content over the internet. From the article: "The patent, which is described as being for a 'multimedia communications system and method for providing audio on demand to subscribers' (No. 6,985,932), describes the idea of permitting a PC user to play back audio, video and other information on a PC. RealNetworks executives said the technology was distinguished from other similar systems by the fact that it permitted "intelligent" streaming of data in potentially congested networks."
Vague? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Vague? (Score:1)
Re:Vague? Only at NYT (Score:5, Informative)
An audio-on-demand communication system provides real-time playback of audio data transferred via telephone lines or other communication links. One or more audio servers include memory banks which store compressed audio data. At the request of a user at a subscriber PC, an audio server transmits the compressed audio data over the communication link to the subscriber PC. The subscriber PC receives and decompresses the transmitted audio data in less than real-time using only the processing power of the CPU within the subscriber PC. According to one aspect of the present invention, high quality audio data compressed according to lossless compression techniques is transmitted together with normal quality audio data. According to another aspect of the present invention, metadata, or extra data, such as text, captions, still images, etc., is transmitted with audio data and is simultaneously displayed with corresponding audio data. The audio-on-demand system also provides a table of contents indicating significant divisions in the audio clip to be played and allows the user immediate access to audio data at the listed divisions. According to a further aspect of the present invention, servers and subscriber PCs are dynamically allocated based upon geographic location to provide the highest possible quality in the communication link." http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=
Re:Vague? Only at NYT (Score:2)
Without any extra details, I'll assume that as usual the patent was awarded without any consideration for prior art.
Re:Vague? (Score:2)
Re:Vague? (Score:4, Funny)
IE, your clock radio syncing up to GMT is not "intelligent," your clock radio figuring out where your hand will be when you try to hit the snooze alarm, and walking out of the way so you don't hit it, is intelligent.
Re:Vague? (Score:1)
Re:Vague? (Score:2)
Also, make it very expensive, so the owner feels compelled to catch it before it self destructs.
Re:Vague? (Score:1)
Patents stink (Score:5, Informative)
This Real patent is just stupid "Click to stream", I'm actually wondering whether its announcement comes on the back of the changes Microsoft made to force people to click to activate?
They should be bouyed up by the yellow stream coming out of every web developers *censored* as they piss all over them with newer improved methods for getting the data across.
On that score, does anyone know which sites use Helix so I can blacklist them? (hosts format would be nice
The article also mentions that Real shouldn't even have it anyway:
The new patent is known as a continuation patent, with additional claims based on an original filing in November 1994. One of the challenges that will confront RealNetworks in enforcing the patent is an earlier one owned by Apple Computer. Apple applied for a patent related to its QuickTime technology for streaming media in May 1994, before RealNetworks' first filing. The Apple patent, No. 5,561,670, for "method and apparatus for operating a multicast system on an unreliable network," was issued in October 1996. It appears the patent office examiners did not consider it in their evaluation of the RealNetworks patent.
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Re:Patents stink (Score:2, Funny)
Buffering...
Re:Patents stink (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Patents stink (Score:2)
Re:Patents stink (Score:1)
Re:Patents stink (Score:4, Informative)
The US Patent Office appears to have a specific method for finding "prior art". Which whilst it often results in false negatives, AFAIK, never results in false positives.
Re:Patents stink (Score:3, Funny)
Don't worry if Real comes after Microsoft, they can just make IE "double click to stream".
Re:Patents stink (Score:2)
That's because they can't, and they shouldn't. We don't do first-to-file here, we do first-to-invent. It's not a Patent Office examiner's job to work out who first reduced an invention to practice, who conceived it first, or who was dillegent in working on it, nor should it be. That takes a jury.
I just don't think it's reasonable to have expected the Patent Office (in 1994) to be able to even full
OOH OOH! (Score:2, Interesting)
I think I'll patent instant messaging by saying that my technology "intelligently" transfers text back and forth...
Re:OOH OOH! (Score:1)
Re:OOH OOH! (Score:2)
Re:OOH OOH! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:OOH OOH! (Score:2, Funny)
An intelligent filter that gets rid of annoying AOLers? Now that's the first legitly patentable idea I've heard for a long time!
Prior art... Smith & Wesson already has this one covered.
Yet More Patent Abuse. (Score:3, Insightful)
What do you want to bet that RealNetworks is going to use this patent to sue anyone else who develops an "intelligent" method of streaming data?
Re:Yet More Patent Abuse. (Score:2, Insightful)
These are my words with bad grammar but they are based on facts found by EU court.
I hope the real reason behind this patent is that. Against "windows media 11 with intellisense technology". "The great invention you can download with 1 click in Vista".
Real
Re:Yet More Patent Abuse. (Score:1)
It won't bother me, because my patent I'm about to file is about a brilliant method of streaming data.
Cheers,
Scott
Re:Yet More Patent Abuse. (Score:3, Funny)
More Patent Abuse. Yay!!! (Score:2)
They'll also try to squeeze the telcos who are trying to keep us on their 'sit the fuck down spot on seven and watch what ever crap we can scare up cheap to feed you' schedule.
Podcasting, RSS and podcatching are like TiVO on steroids with some feed back ability to boot.
They say 'screw you' to the telcos who are trying to get everybody to pay extra for what is now 'dark fiber' buried under the ground.
Remember GlobalCrossing?
What happened to all the fibre they laid
Re:Yet More Patent Abuse. (Score:1)
if everyone did this they might stop this crap as it eats their servers to peices
I think (Score:5, Informative)
When your network goes havoc the 128kbit realaudio/video falls down to 96kbit first, than 64kbit etc. The trick is it also somehow "senses" the network lag has been fixed and it goes back to the normal level.
That is half of the reason why on movie trailer sites you see multiple stream rates for windows media and one stream link (unified) for real media. The other reason is the "layered" way of doing things in realmedia. A single file can have multiple bitrates.
These are things they invented or not, I don't really care. I don't also like the "patenting" of such things. There should be a way to make it free for opensource community implementing and not to Microsoft.
Helix open source leg can do it?
As I got my lesson from last time, posting as AC. Sorry
Re:I think (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I think (Score:1)
Re:I think (Score:2)
Re:I think (Score:2)
Re:I think (Score:2)
My patent for cold fusion is novel... but that was before the oil companies paid me to supress it.
Re:I think (Score:3, Funny)
1) Choose one or more data transport related verb: "sending", "receiving", "delivering", "reading", "transmiting"
2) Add a generic data format name (eg, "video", "audio", "text") or if all are taken a more specific one (eg "stock quotes", "tv clips")
3) Add a data transport type name (eg "wireless", "internet")
4) Optionally add a transport timing name (eg "asynchronous", "on request", "real-time")
5) Mix it all up with some patentish w
Re:I think (Score:2)
GPL v4: Free for Operating Systems that have the source code made publically available to all.
Moglen, Stallman, you listening? I'm available for consulting work. 2000 of your "US dollars" per day. Oh, and a day is 5 of your so-called "Earth hours". And you buy lunch.
Re:I think (Score:2)
Patent it yourself and allow it to the OSS folks but not to Microsoft?
Release it under your own license that says it can only be used for non-commercial activities?
Of course these require you to come up with the idea before someone beats you to it.
Re:I think (Score:2, Interesting)
There is a way. If the patent holder decides to license their technology for free to OSS then there you go. But it sounds like you're saying "I didn't invent this (I think it'll be argued that neither did Real Networks), but I like Open-Source software so there should be some form of exemption for OSS to ignore patents." Replace OSS with "huge corporate monopolies" and you could be a flack for Microsoft. I
Ogg Vorbis Bitrate Peeling (Score:5, Informative)
Ogg Vorbis supports bitrate peeling [wikipedia.org], but it is not currently implemented. Apparently RealNetwork's SureStream encodes a given file at multiple bitrates resulting in a fat file, while bitrate peeling only needs a single encoding. Real's patent appears to be on the streaming logic to actually switch bitrate though, not the storage of bits in a file.
Re:I think (Score:2)
Anyone familiar with both TCP and media codecs knows that this is trivial.
No. (Score:1)
Don't think of Real's streaming model as anything mor
Point proven (Score:1)
Oh, boy. (Score:4, Funny)
~Philly
Re:Oh, boy. (Score:5, Funny)
Cue an avalanche of "Buffering..." jokes in 3... 2...Buffering... 1...
Re:Oh, boy. (Score:2)
Number 1. (Score:2)
* Click to search for prior art regarding this patent application.
(Click!)
The following prior arts have been found. Listing 1-10 of approx. 236,772
1. -
buffering...
Re:Oh, boy. (Score:2)
"Gee, I didn't know that you could patent 'Buffering.'"
Thank you providing a place for me.
Re:Oh, boy. (Score:2)
Real or Relevant? (Score:4, Interesting)
Am I bitter? Yeah. Real was fairly innovative in the day and though Media Player had its part in shrinking the marketshare, it wasn't like Real didn't get pushy and lamer after a while. How's that OSS deal they had (was it helixcode?) going nowadays anyway?
In other news, I wouldn't be surprised if the patent actually pertains to a streaming download occasionally interrupted by the word "Buffering" followed by 3 ellipses.
Re:Real or Relevant? (Score:1)
Re:Real or Relevant? (Score:1)
. The fact that you continue to be bitter about something that no longer possibly is true is sad. You may go ahead and flame me now.
WTF is streaming exactly? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:WTF is streaming exactly? (Score:2)
If you really want to know, why don't you read the patent?
If you do so, you'll have the rare privilege of finding that (for example) the claims that this is about fallback and/or buffering, and complete nonsense! The statements about buffering at least have a minimal defense -- as you'd expect in describing a streaming system, the patent claims do mention the client system having buffers -- though even there it's a bit more restrictive than wou
Re:WTF is streaming exactly? (Score:1)
They patented static text? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:They patented static text? (Score:4, Funny)
That's more of a trademark than a patent.
Oooo! A bribable patent office! Hurray! (Score:1, Troll)
Oh well, good thing prior art for this is fucking everywhere.
Much ado about nothing (Score:1)
So, the way I read this, and company flacks have made statements that support it, is that as long as you're not using their exact method, which is "intelligent", you're OK.
OSS Coders, Start working on super-ingenious streaming video methods!
Re:Much ado about nothing (Score:1)
"3... 2... 1... Buffered!"
Re:Much ado about nothing (Score:1)
Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:4, Informative)
I found out about it only after Click and Clack [cartalk.com] switched back to Real Player's format [cartalk.com] after having temporarily using Windows Media Player. Their reasoning was similar to mine; many older folks were having trouble locating the free Real Player. Despite the fact that Tom and Rau were able to make nice with Real Networks, I was never able to. But, thanks to my friend Sean, I shall never have to go through 4 different option menus to disable a message center again.
Besides, the Real Alternative codec seems better able to stream than Real's own player software. I assume the codec is just the "guts" of the player with no fluff...perhaps all of the extra system resources are being used by, oh, the message center checking on the latest dirt about TomKat or something.
Re:Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:2)
You are getting confused. A CODEC is not a player. Your software is reading the same CODEC. obviously. The application may be better, but how can it change the CODEC used by sites that deploy Real media stuff?
Re:Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:2)
Re:Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:2)
Incorrect. CODEC standa for "Compression/Decompression scheme." And it is decoding the same data, so it will be the efficiency of the application that causes the difference. It can't recode the already compressed data.
Re:Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:2)
Re:Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:2)
Re:Real Alternative & Media Player Classic (Score:2)
Dammit.... (Score:4, Funny)
Dammit! I just got finished patenting all the stupid ways of doing it...
Buffering.. (Score:1)
Streaming of patent description closed due to network congestion. Please try to file your patent again later.
Real gets streaming patent, includes with FOSS Lic (Score:4, Informative)
Click-to-Stream joins the portfolio of over 35 patents related to digital media, many that are available to Helix DNA Software licensees. As many of you know, over 50 commercial and open source companies, including Nokia, Linspire, Motorola, Novell, Real, Red Hat, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, Sun Microsystems, Trolltech and Xandros, have licensed Helix DNA software and its patented technology to build media-enabled products.
So what about the GPL license you ask? Yes, the Helix DNA Client (the FOSS media framework which supports any format and any operating system) is licensed under the GPL license. And what about patents under the GPL? As you may know, the proposed draft 3.0 of GPL contains an express patent license, whereas the current version of GPL being used by Real (version 2.0) does not contain a patent license. There is broad and public discussion about whether and to what extent an implicit patent license is or is not granted under the GPL, and if so, what the scope of such a license would be. Real's concerns regarding the uncertain nature of such an implied license has led Real to expressly disclaim any implied patent license under its GPL license grant, and to encourage Open Source developers who desire an express patent license from Real to take a license from Real under the RealNetworks Public Source License. For those who nevertheless prefer to use the code under the GPL, we assure you that Real has no plans to pursue any abiding GPL licensee of the Helix DNA Client software - We fully encourage open source software innovation and the collaboration among our licensees.
Here is the actual announcement: http://www.realnetworks.com/company/press/release
Here is the licensing FAQ https://helixcommunity.org/content/faq-licenses [helixcommunity.org]
Kevin Foreman,
GM, Real
Re:Real gets streaming patent, includes with FOSS (Score:2)
Re:Real gets streaming patent, includes with FOSS (Score:5, Informative)
Not to be rude, as you may fool some younger Slashdotters, but not me. Fact is, there were streaming audio solutions on the Internet well before 1994. How do I know? Well, I took part in the development of one of them, and helped with the porting effort of several others.
I'll keep the list of examples short and sweet, others may add as they please.
AudioFile [mit.edu]
The Network Audio System (NAS) [radscan.com]
Note: These systems, as were several others, were OSS right from the start.
Re:Real gets streaming patent, includes with FOSS (Score:4, Interesting)
In a client/server architecture, network transfer delays can cometimes make the arrival of data less predictable than if it were coming from a physical device. This can result in underruns (data not arriving in time) or overruns (more data arriving than there is room for) if the delays are sufficiently large. If an underrun or overrun occurs, the affected element is "Paused" until more data or space becomes available. To avoid pauses, applications can control the amount of data that is kept for each input and output element and can request notices whenever an input begins to run out of data or an output has to buffer up too much data.
How does that fail to qualify as prior art?
Red herring. The codecs are still restricted (Score:4, Informative)
Sure it is, but none of the codecs are. So it's 100% worthless.
There are zillions of "frameworks" avalailable already. It's the codecs we need, and Real still requires their commercial license for those.
Re:Real gets streaming patent, includes with FOSS (Score:1)
Does anyone else remember the opt in list of crapware with real player where the list of checkbox options scrolls.. All of the options in view are unchecked, but if you scroll down the rest are all checked, so users just click next and "opt in" to install a ton of crapware. Everything they ever do reeks of stuff like this.
Real will
Re:Real gets streaming patent, includes with FOSS (Score:2)
Why should the community trust the good intentions of Real?
The point is that independent software developers should not be subject to the "goodwill" of predatory corporations.
Do people really still not get this? Or are these bland assurances as deceitful as they appear?
In case you're still not getting it...
What happens when Real decides it d
On the other hand ... (Score:2)
Re:On the other hand ... (Score:2)
The fact that you're about the zillionth person I've heard say this makes me finally break down and say "Wuhhh?"
I've never had anything but terrible experiences with WMV. Skipping in a local file entails ~30 seconds of waiting for the video to catch back up while I look at a still frame of pr0n -- it's instant in Real. Skipping streaming video, as far as I can tell, isn't even possible with WMV. The cont
I can patent too. (Score:2)
Big bucks here I come!
Re:I can patent too. (Score:2)
Re:I can patent too. (Score:2)
Re:I can patent too. (Score:2)
What's the difference between the last two?
Really, the question is more one of what's the difference between ANY of those three?
And the answer is simply that, in the order they are listed, they go from "least dishonest" to "most dishonest"...
Re:I can patent too. (Score:2)
My opinion (Score:2)
Um... (Score:2, Funny)
possible prior art (Score:1, Informative)
Here's a 1996 paper [ucsd.edu].
Reaction? (Score:2)
We're sitting here discussing how bad it really is, but the politicians in charge of it do nothing... Something's really broken in the process isn't it.
F'ing great (Score:2, Informative)
I can just imagine folks the world over will be beating on their door to license such wonderfully working software!
Or people could just do MPEG-4 or Quicktime streaming and never have to deal with the unending stream of "BUffering...." seen in almost any Real Networks product.
Re:F'ing great (Score:1)
Re:F'ing great (Score:1)
what is so horrible about xvid? (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't think so...
but why do they force people to use these properitary software players? (I just say "you want fullscreen? that costs 30$" thank you, apple) first of all this does NOT prevent the trailers from being downloaded, but I guess thats what they think...
but w
Re:what is so horrible about xvid? (Score:2)
Go to the site the trailer lives on, view source, and do a search on "mov". The filename usually won't be the first term (since it'll usually have the word "movie" on the site in several places).
Then, once you've found the URL, go to a console window (either a shell in Linux or a cygwin shell in Windows), and type in "wget [URL]" - you can copy and paste the URL in to the text window (middle click on X, right click on cygwin).
Once
A case of copyrighting basic concepts again (Score:1)
It's mine! (Score:1)
Now, everyone who has ever used it, pay up! (Oh, and that would be a payment--10 cents US)--for each individual time it was used.)
Re:Buoys? (Score:3, Funny)
(The one advantage to having worked there: I got to see why OOP in C++ is a Very Bad Idea.)
Re:Buoys? (Score:2)
Re:Buoys? (Score:2)
When you have to debug a 1.2GB source tree, it gets ugly. Very ugly.
Granted, some of my most harrowing experiences in C++ were a res
Re:Buoys? (Score:2)
Yup; most of the (rather few) good, readable C++ code I've seen is basically written like that. Most of it compiles fine under a plain C compiler; there are just a few structs that have been written as classes to take advantage of some of the OO capabilities in an elegant fashion.
Mostly, though, the best explanation I've seen for the widespread disastrous nature of C++ projects is the comment that C++ is a "write-only language". Usually nobody
Re:Why are patents so unpopular? (Score:2)
You are infringing on my patent for methods of mentioning Digg on slashdot. Please cease and desist immediately, or you shall be hearing from my lawyer.
We should all be so "desperate" as Real Networks (Score:3, Informative)
Real Networks stock is up 38% since February. Rhapsody's subscription and download service is doing quite well, thank you very much, in a market dominated by iTunes.
Results for the first quarter of 2006 will be released next week, but right now, things are looking pretty damn good for Real.
RealNetworks Benefiting From Video Offerings [forbes.com]