Steve Jobs Hints At Theora Lawsuit 686
netcrawler writes "Steve Jobs' open letter on Flash has prompted someone at the Free Software Foundation Europe to ask him about his support of proprietary format H.264 over Theora. Jobs' pithy answer (email with headers) suggests Theora might infringe on existing patents and that 'a patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other "open source" codecs now.' Does he know something we don't?"
Update: 05/01 00:38 GMT by T : Monty Montgomery of Xiph (the group behind Theora, as well as Ogg Vorbis, and more) provides a pointed, skeptical response to the implicit legal threat, below.
Monty writes: "Thomson Multimedia made their first veiled patent threats against
Vorbis almost ten years ago. MPEG-LA has been rumbling for the
past few years. Maybe this time it will actually come to
something, but it hasn't yet. I'll get worried when the lawyers advise
me to; i.e., not yet.The MPEG-LA has insinuated for some time that it is impossible to build any video codec without infringing on at least some of their patents. That is, they assert they have a monopoly on all digital video compression technology, period, and it is illegal to even attempt to compete with them. Of course, they've been careful not to say quite exactly that.
If Jobs's email is genuine, this is a powerful public gaffe ('All video codecs are covered by patents.') He'd be confirming MPEG's assertion in plain language anyone can understand. It would only strengthen the pushback against software patents and add to Apple's increasing PR mess. Macbooks and iPads may be pretty sweet, but creative individuals don't really like to give their business to jackbooted thugs."
He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Funny)
He doesn't know anything that we don't already know.
However, he, on the other hand, thinks different. (TM).
The bottom line (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The bottom line (Score:5, Funny)
What if dirty hippies are stealing your apples? You know, they hop over your fence, climb up your apple tree, and start taking the apples. You confront them, and they're all like, "Yo, man, you can't, um, steal mother nature." Then flash those damned, self-righteous smug looks.
I think they're working for Al Gore. Like, his henchmen or something. After all, he _IS_ on the board of directors for Apple Computers (TM).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What if dirty hippies are stealing your apples?
This explains the missing part of the Apple's apple. Jobs saw him stealing the apples and shot with his rock salt iShotgun.
Re:The bottom line (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The bottom line (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, I heard about that and I got an iPad. But for some reason I can't get this stupid Linux to work. No wonder nobody uses Linux when it is so hard to use.
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Funny)
However, he, on the other hand, thinks different. (TM).
He also walks on water and shits ice cream.
Re:Steve Jobs is different; he is abusive. (Score:4, Funny)
Steve Jobs walks into a coffee shop and finds a college-aged student drinking chai, busily typing away on a laptop in front of him on the table.
"Hey, kid, what's up?" Steve Jobs flashes a big smile, and extends his warm, friendly paw.
The college kid looks up while sipping on his drink, and for a moment does not register his messiah, until he does a double take and spills chai down his shirt.
"Wow! It's really Steve Jobs! I hope you heard my prayer last night!"
"Um, yeah..." Jobs says, affirming the question with a hint of confusion. "Look, I'll give you an iPod, signed with my name on it, if you give me your liver."
College student's eyes widen. He can barely contain his excitement, and he manages to mutter a weak "yes" before passing out from his sheer spiritual bliss.
The next day, Steve Jobs woke up for the first time in a long time, ages in fact, free from jaundice and a new hankering for a few shots of Malibu, and was last seen leaving a box that said "i-p-p-p-p-p-pod" on a grave in a cemetery.
Re:Steve Jobs is different; he is abusive. (Score:5, Funny)
I've always been a PC at heart.
Not like the rest, the others. Everyone around me. I was at odds with my society and knew it early since birth. Unlike them, I did not "Think Different!"--the mantra of the Macs around me, the phrase on all the billboards in the city that served as a reminder to its citizenry. Sameness pervaded the essence of my being and no amount of self-conditioning I did could change that. Eventually, I gave up and isolated myself emotionally from society.
I gaze at the faces going by, the white earphones contrasting their black turtlenecks, connecting their ears to their pockets, their blank faces engrossed in hip Indie rock music and various garage bands. I envied them for their perfection against my flaws and my compulsive nature to expand, to burden my life with troubles instead of remaining, like them, simple and easy to deal with. The grandest of virtues, simplicity... the philosophy by our loyal benefactor Steve Jobs, who descended from the heavens, creating the Earth, the iron, the wind and the rain. Steve Jobs, who defined the parameters of existence, the one who set about the patterns of reality, the constants, the variables. He who made gravity, electromagnetic energy, and shaped atomic structures and brought forth motion. From these things, he crafted the elements, processed them, refined them, and from these things engineered Apple products through the purity of his mind. Each Apple product was individually crafted by his own hands with the programming code used to run each device having being compiled in his brain and uploaded to each device telepathically, breathing life and perfection into each and every unit.
Except, it seems, for me, for I was not among the many. I was a PC. They were Macs. I've always been a cold, stiff person. I got by, disguising myself by keeping my non-Ipod music player safely out of sight, which I use because of my depraved nature demanding more functionality than the simple and easy-to-use Ipods have to offer.. In the safety of my own home, behind locked doors, I ran a Forbidden, a contraband computer from more depraved, earlier days that was not given the love and blessing of being birthed by Steve Jobs. I dual booted, out of the great sin of curiosity-- curiosity, a shameful value of a PC, as curiosity has no place where simplicity matters most--using two of the great unutterable blasphemies-- something called "Windows Vista" and something else called "Linux." Although, as I mentioned before, although my tendency to be a PC and towards conformity has always been inherent to me, I was truly transformed when I found these old things in a hidden cache of computer parts predating The Purging. Perhaps the greatest sin of all, the single evil that, if discovered, would damn me forever, was the fact that my mouse had more than one button.
As I walk among the Macs on the streets, passing the Starbuckses as I went along, I wondered how it all came to this. I glanced at The Holy Marks on the foreheads as the people wandered down the streets, the Bitten Apple tattooed on all our of us at birth, and wondered if, perhaps, there could be something more to life. But again, this was a PC's thought, and not, like everyone elses', a Mac's. We were to hold ourselves to the philosophy of Steve Jobs--so as his products were designed for idiots, so too were we to be idiots. But I was not a Mac--I was not an idiot. I was simply too complicated to be a worthwhile person.
Nature called. I found a nearby public iPoo--squeaky clean and sparkly white, things weren't all bad--and let myself go, expelling the waste that had accumulated inside me. After relieving myself and committing the overly-complicated and thus illegal act of wiping my ass (I did not flush as iPoos, designed to be idiot-proof, did not flush) I left and once again wandered the streets aimlessly, hoping to find some meaning in a world where I simply did not belong, a world where if my true nature was discovered, I would be endlessly persecuted by smug, self-righteous sons of bitches.
Re:Steve Jobs is different; he is abusive. (Score:4, Informative)
Companies will be companies (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Steve Jobs is different; he is abusive. (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude you forgot to include the joke as well.
I disagree. I thought it captured the essence of both Jobs and his followers rather well. Now, if you happen to be one of those followers, you probably found the post much less entertaining.
Re:Steve Jobs is different; he is abusive. (Score:5, Insightful)
Thanks.
Jobs is worse than Bill Gates.... granted, both are pretty much assholes, but Jobs, I feel, is even worse. He's just lucky to be the underdog so he can look like he's fighting the bad guy.
I don't even think (correct me if I'm wrong) that even Bill Gates stole from his #2.... Wozniak was the mind behind the Apple II and yet Steve Jobs cheats Wozniak out of money because he, Woz, was in the hospital at the time (if I have the story straight). What a great man to run a company. Hell, maybe he can be an "innovative" CEO by asking potential employees if they're virgins or not! Think Different!
Apple's R&D, marketing, and innovation is far better than Microsofts, and that's undoubtedly true. But the way they act, their soviet style secrecy, suing fans of theirs who leak material simply because they love Apple's hardware and software, disgusts me. They're worse than Microsoft and as bad as MS is, I'm almost glad they were the monopoly we got in the 80s and 90s and not Apple Computers.
Plus Apple gets it a bit easier, with them taking the backbone of their O/S from FreeBSD.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I can say without a doubt in my mind that any H.264 implementation infringes on patent clauses for patents not in the patent pool ... all software of non trivial complexity infringes on patents.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The whole idea is to come up with new and different ways to do things, not get pissed off because someone else beat you to it.
In the old days and I'm sure it still happens. There are guys working in large companies watching several patents and as soon as they expire they implement the item and sell it to us without giving the original inventor one red cent. I say patent holders need to make hay while the
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes but the H.264 implementation only infringes on the patents of the holders of the H.264 patents.
How do you know?
You snooze, you lose (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You snooze, you lose (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You forgot to ad that there's nothing to protect users of h264 from OTHER patent claims.
And theora's response was the exact right one to take.
BTW - a lot of the world doesn't buy into software patents. Let's see if the Supremes get it right with Bilski.
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm guessing the AC above isn't interested in disclosing his identity in connection with the slanderous claim above because he knows it to be untrue.
Xiph.org has never taken a "don't tell us" position, nor to the best of my knowledge have any of our contributors in connection to Xiph.org activities. Willful ignorance is not a viable strategy in this field.
We very much want to know about any real patent exposure, especially from someone actually competent enough to raise reasonable concerns (Not likely from a 2L without particular patent training and video coding experience, but still). We have expended considerable effort knowing about, dodging, and helping others review the patent status of our work. After all— this stuff exists for the very purpose of being unencumbered.
--Greg Maxwell (greg@xiph.org)
Yes, only he can see than dancing fairies (Score:5, Interesting)
As a Theora developer, this is news to me. Would you mind mentioning who this buddy is so I can go back through my mail queue and verify that you're just making shit up?
I know you're lying, as regardless of what our response would have been it most certainly would _not_ have been, "ssshhh don't tell anyone".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sigh.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No. The GP's post is an example of why software patents(and all patents) need to be sane.
New ideas provide value for society, new ways of doing things, new things to do, all help to enhance everyone's quality of life. Without some form of protection, the only way to make any money off good ideas(and therefor the only way to encourage people to spend time coming up with good ideas) is by keeping them secret which doesn't really benefit anyone.
You do not have some sort of right to implement someone else's ide
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Okay why is it that one form of mathematics can be patented and other kinds cant? All a computer program is is a mathematical algorithm. I'm a professional scientists, when do I get to patent the maths I derive? Not that I'd ever want one.
Software patents are insane because they allow you to patent maths. I'd like to think it's obvious why you don't want a field as interconnected and related as mathematics to be patented. What happens when some clever mathematician shows some alogrithm to be isomorphic (the
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll feed the troll....sorry.
Get over it guys he can have opinions just like you and me.
You don't quite understand the difference between "opinion" and "veiled threat"? Really? He's producing FUD while possibly trying to launch an abusive lawsuit based on software patents(which are patently evil themselves) on Theora basically because he sits on the license board for H.264.
This isn't an opinion. It's an open declaration of war on an NGO. If your brain weren't so apparently dependent on Apple's marketing trolls, I wouldn't understand how you could possibly be fine with that.
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no difference if the threat is expressed as an opinion.
Those are two different things. An opinion is something like "I think they may get sued." A threat is "I will probably sue you."
An opinion is based on what your personal feelings at the time are. A threat is when you factually confront someone with the aim of informing them you will or may do bad things to them.
For example, me saying "I think you will get killed if you keep running into traffic like that." is my opinion. Me saying, "I will kill you." is a threat and is, in fact, illegal.
Stop me if I'm going to fast for you.
Dealing with your competitors FUD is the price of doing business
Excuse me, Glen Beck, but at what point is Theora trying to make money?
There used to be a course given at business schools called "business ethics". At some point, yes, they appear to have gone to the wayside more and more lately. They did that in the past too. Interesting you used the word "firing line".
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
Producing something for free as a service has never been a "business". Ever.
Apparently, the only thing you hold dear is your stock portfolio, up on your own personal "high horse"(you did start with "Linux dweebies and Microsoft apologists"). So any further discussion involving anything other then dollar signs would be as fruitless as describing Pythagorean theory to a gnat.
So, while I still have karma to burn, I feel absolutely entitled and justified in saying that people like you are everything that is wrong with humanity. Get off my fucking lawn.
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems clear to me that Mr. Jobs has adopted Microsoft tactics. If someone threatens the profitability of your product - exterminate them. Jobs is planning to attack Theora with what amounts to a frivolous lawsuit. Even if he loses, it won't matter, because Theora will be driven into bankruptcy by the attack. It sounds just like 90s-era Microsoft.
And even if Theora survives, the battle will have left them so depleted that they'll longer be a competitor. However you look at it, Jobs accomplishes his goal.
Re:He doesn't know something we don't. (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple is so much worse than Microsoft now. Maybe worse than Microsoft ever was. A trailblazer in terms of vendor lock-in - they've paved the way for totally closed software environments, a concept that would have seemed so insanely backwards 5-10 years ago that nobody would have believed it would be the trend of the future. Apple is clearly THE primary threat to software freedom these days.
The scary thing is that MS customers always knew they were being screwed and just had to settle, but Apple makes their customers want it. The majority sees nothing at all wrong with what's happening - never mind things like this that they don't know about. They fawn over iPhones and iPads, Average Joes fucking line-camp for this stuff. It's scary as hell, I've only seen otherwise sane people roll over and spread en masse like this for homeowner's associations, I thought it was just because houses are huge investments and people often don't have much of a choice, but I guess I was wrong and people can abandon all sense of freedom for anything they want enough.
ZOMG OSS *KNEELS* (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh wow they have some open source stuff, just like Microsoft, they're totally absolved of all those entirely unrelated things I talked about in my post, oh how wrong I was about them, they're total saints because the core of their OSes and some other doodads are open source.
If robots running OSS destroy humanity I will rejoice, for our death would be righteous.
Well (Score:3, Insightful)
Luckily, there are no software patents :-)
Another article on SJ (Score:4, Funny)
Can we do this maybe just once a day?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Am I being manipulated into this anger, or have they just put their heel on the back of my neck long enough that their propaganda has stopped working?
Are those your only choices? You're not being manipulated into anger. The fact that you are angry at "the rich" when an article about Steve Jobs' opinion on one piece of open source software comes along strikes me as a bit over-furious. LOL
Re: (Score:3)
What do those two things even have to do with each other?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree. I think Apple hasn't had the opportunity to be nearly as evil as Microsoft yet. But the ways things are going, I have no doubt they'll take the opportunity as soon as it presents itself.
And, while I half expected this, I'm still angry about it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I agree. I think Apple hasn't had the opportunity to be nearly as evil as Microsoft yet. But the ways things are going, I have no doubt they'll take the opportunity as soon as it presents itself.
And, while I half expected this, I'm still angry about it.
Are you kidding me? I still have an original Apple ][ Standard (Integer ROM) somewhere in a box around here.Spent some years coding for the thing, only to have Apple refuse to improve even basic aspects of the design (the keyboard for one) and do it's damnedest to kill off any competition. They they dropped it like a hot potato, refused to provide any support, and when you called up to, say, order a spare disk controller PROM the answer was "we've never made any such product, sir, we recommend you purchase
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ya know... Ubuntu Lucid Lynx is looking better all the time. I wonder if it'll run on my MacBookPro before I put it onto Craigslist....
Jobs has become the new Gates and Ballmer. What a wonderful guy.
There's a point where his 'it just works' changes to 'he's just a jerk'. I think that point is getting really, really close.
Too bad. What nice toys he makes. Darwin to MacOS X was so smooth. Now the Snow Leopard release has about the same bugs as a Windows release. Once the viruses start, I'll be long gone. Pity
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Turns out that Canonical is an H.264 licensee. They don't care much more about free video formats than Steve Jobs does.
The Steve Jobs douchebaggery is in full swing! (Score:5, Funny)
Apple's new slogan: "There's a patent for that."
Re:The Steve Jobs douchebaggery is in full swing! (Score:5, Insightful)
And now Apple drops all pretense of being the underdog and joins the ranks of the FUD purveyors.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The Steve Jobs douchebaggery is in full swing! (Score:5, Informative)
There's a difference between FUD and actual legal issues. Mozilla can't support H.264 in Firefox out of the box.
It is a bit annoying, however, that they absolutely refuse to use local libraries (DirectShow, GStreamer, etc) to access what codecs the user has available.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
because, douchebag, local libraries make the ui platform dependent. have you looked at the architecture diagram of xul lately?
Connect the dots (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft conspicuously said today that IE9 will only support H.264 for HTML5 video. Add in Apple and you have the two largest consumer OS vendors backing the same codec. I suspect they do know something the public doesn't, even if they themselves will not be a party to this patent challenge.
Theora will just end up becoming collateral damage in the coming war all of the large vendors are about to wage with Google. Follow the breadcrumbs and that's where you eventually end up.
Re:Connect the dots (Score:4, Insightful)
and MKV is better than MOV, AVI, and WMV...
Open formats and technology scare the crap out of them.
Granted MKV is just a container... it is still a far better container.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Granted MKV is just a container... it is still a far better container.
... that doesn't work with most devices or software on the market.
Re:Connect the dots (Score:5, Informative)
Ogg is the container, Theora is the codec. Confusion arises sometimes because Ogg Vorbis music files are typically called "oggs", even though Vorbis is the codec in that case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogg [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theora [wikipedia.org]
Re:Connect the dots (Score:4, Informative)
There are 811 AVC/H.264 licensees [mpegla.com] and 26 licensors [mpegla.com]
Apple and Microsoft are licensors along with industrial mega-corps like Mitsubishi Electric, Sony and Toshiba.
Google and Canonical are licensees.
H.264 has tremendous strength simply in OEM support and brand-name consumer tech. There are no significant players missing here.
Lots of patents (Score:4, Informative)
Interestingly, Apple has only one patent.
Re:Connect the dots (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately for Microsoft and Apple they actually believe that they control something. Currently there is no h.264 content out there for HTML5 video and Microsoft and Apple have no means to create it.
Unfortunately, Google controls YouTube and what YouTube chooses to use is what matters. Like it or lump it, they are the standard for internet video which is why Steve Jobs has had to answer some uncomfortable questions about why Apple is incompatible with YouTube, and not the other way around. Google have rather steered away from h.264 in recent weeks towards VP8 (the successor to Theora), largely because they know they'll be steering a car that could take any direction it likes in the coming years and it will be used by Apple at some point to try and shoot YouTube and Google down. Microsoft and Apple in particular have no content to be able to dictate what format people will use, so they have to resort to threats.
Re:Connect the dots (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately for Microsoft and Apple they actually believe that they control something. Currently there is no h.264 content out there for HTML5 video and Microsoft and Apple have no means to create it.
Tens of millions, hundreds of millions, of cell phones, web cams and camcorders generating H.264 video every minute of every day.
Two fantastically rich corporations with deep penetration into the consumer market space. Partnerships with global content providers and distribution networks.
Out of the game the both of them.
This is what On2 had to say before the merger:
What capabilities does H.264 add to the Adobe Flash Player?
Support of H.264 allows choice for consumers and enterprises, and gives users access to a broader range of content for the Flash Player. Many in the broadcast industry, including content providers for HD DVD/Blue Ray DVD, already encode in H.264. To enable the most efficient consumption of this content on the PC using the Flash Player, supporting H.264 makes sense, and allows users of the new player to avoid delays or other artifacts associated with a transcoding step for a better viewing experience. The already ubiquitous Flash Player has now extended its reach to play back H.264 content across all PC platforms, i.e., Windows, Mac and Linux. Support Center H.264 FAQ [on2.com]
Google is the key here (Score:5, Insightful)
They need to move fast, clean VP8 up and push it into Chrome, Android and youtube. Firefox and Opera will follow quickly and the attempt to lock web multimedia into propietary formats from Apple and Microsoft will fail.
This move from Apple and the Microsoft's statement about only supporting H.264 are a reaction to Google's purchase of VP8. Both Apple and Microsoft are terrified of Google. They are willing to give up quicktime and wmv as long as Google doesn't succeed in pushing an open source, patent free solution to web video.
Rubbish (Score:5, Insightful)
This makes no sense to me. Lets run with your thought experiment for a moment. Google release a blinding implementation of VP8 support in Chrome next week, then FF and Opera pick it up and release browser updates the week after. Somehow, content providers decide this is a great idea and they all jump on the VP8 band wagon. How does this hurt Apple? What's to stop Apple from adding it to OS X and the iPhone OS along side H.264 and supporting both. How does this give google some kind of competitive edge over Apple that would make Apple "terrified"? They both have full access to H.264 and related tools today, so nothing would change with adoption of VP8: the status quo is maintained. You're just trying to blind people with FUD.
Re:Rubbish (Score:5, Insightful)
Somehow, content providers decide this is a great idea and they all jump on the VP8 band wagon. How does this hurt Apple?
It doesn't. But it does hurt the theory that Steve Jobs is out to control eveyone's minds and only Google can stop him, and as such, he is perpetually afraid of Google and is out to destroy them at all costs.
Facts and reality need not apply.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
nowhere did he say it would hurt apple as a company, or give google a competitive edge. what he did say, and that it you made no attempt to refute, is that it would hurt apple's and microsoft's attempts to push proprietary codecs as standard.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
what he did say, and that it you made no attempt to refute, is that it would hurt apple's and microsoft's attempts to push proprietary codecs as standard.
I don't think that Apple and Microsoft have any particular interest in "pushing" H.264 simply because it is proprietary. Rather, it is a CODEC that is widely supported, and in particular has many mobile devices that include hardware decoding support. It also benefits from being pretty clear from a legal perspective with respect to patents. Neither Apple or Microsoft gain anything from it being proprietary.
Re:Rubbish (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think that Apple and Microsoft have any particular interest in "pushing" H.264 simply because it is proprietary.
Yes, they do. The higher they raise the barrier to entry of the particular market, the lower the chances of having a new Google leaving them hanging as it happened with the web market.
It also benefits from being pretty clear from a legal perspective with respect to patents.
Not really. That Apple et al own patents over h.264 doesn't mean there's nobody *else* owning patents over it, as so many Microsoft and Apple products have shown these past couple decades.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, they do. The higher they raise the barrier to entry of the particular market, the lower the chances of having a new Google leaving them hanging as it happened with the web market.
How would Google "leave them hanging" by releasing a video CODEC as Open Source? Apple and Microsoft could just use that, seeing as it is Open Source.
Not really. That Apple et al own patents over h.264 doesn't mean there's nobody *else* owning patents over it, as so many Microsoft and Apple products have shown these past couple decades.
But being a "patent pool" composed of the major players in the industry means that you'd have to be pretty wealthy or ballsy to go up against them.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because Apple and Microsoft are pushing patented, unfree "standards" as a way of raising the barrier to entry to the market. You see, in a free market, the price of goods approaches the cost of their production, which means profit margins tend towards the minimum. Both companies seek to avoid this by raising the barrier to entry to exclude competition. Since the main competition they fear is from free software, they dont even need to raise it very high in monetary terms to lock out their competition and wal
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because Apple and Microsoft are pushing patented, unfree "standards" as a way of raising the barrier to entry to the market. You see, in a free market, the price of goods approaches the cost of their production, which means profit margins tend towards the minimum. Both companies seek to avoid this by raising the barrier to entry to exclude competition.
But neither Microsoft or Apple owns H.264, and the cost of licensing is close to zero (and is actually zero in many cases) so this argument makes no sense. How is H.264 a barrier to entering the market?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lets run with your thought experiment for a moment. Google release a blinding implementation of VP8 support in Chrome next week, then FF and Opera pick it up and release browser updates the week after.
When does VP8 hardware support reach consumers?
In mobile devices? Camcorders? PCs? HDTVs and the set-top box? Not next week. Quite probably not even next year.
Where are the editing tools for both the pro and the amateur?
Meanwhile the installed base for H.264 grows exponentially.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have an answer, though who knows if this is true.
Microsoft loathes Linux and will do anything in their power to destroy it. In the long term, they may even believe it is as big as or a bigger threat than Apple. They have long loved that the problems around proprietary codecs created a barrier to entry for free software platforms. Eventually Ubuntu and others institutionalized workarounds for these (binary codecs and separate distribution), but there are legal problems associated with this. Flash was reall
Re:Rubbish (Score:5, Insightful)
Emphasis mine. Uh, was that a typo? You probably meant to say "US Congress" because it sure as hell isn't Mozilla, Xiph, or FSF who insists that nobody in US is allowed to implement H.264 without first asking for permission. That's the nature of patent law, and in US, Congress is who is responsible for that.
Software patents are anti-pragmatic, and again, that's not FSF's fault. You've got one of the most powerful governments in the world telling programmers what they're allowed and not allowed to implement. That's an outrage, especially in the so-called "land of the free," so maybe focus your anger where's it's deserved.
Re:Google is the key here (Score:5, Insightful)
How does that help? Is VP8 acknowledged by other major players to not infringe on any other patents? Would Google agree to shield all users of VP8 from any legal attacks by patent holders?
I rather expect that the holders of these patents feel that any possible implementation of video on a computer infringes on SOME patent they hold, and if there exists some hypothetical codec that does not infringe I'd guess some team of lawyers didn't do their job right. Sort of like how SCO was claiming that no possible modern operating system could exist without violating SCO intellectual property rights, except using the patent system for the fence-building process. Even if there are codes that are completely free and clear, can you imaging how long it would take a the legal system to sort out such a lawsuit? SCO has dragged their action on for YEARS, and that's without thousands of patents to use as clubs.
If they pick on the developers of Ogg Theora, what happens? Do they stand any chance of carrying on such a lawsuit, as an open source effort? Would various interested companies back them and support them in a fight to the finish? The most frightening interpretation of that email suggests we may actually find out.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Push into Android how exactly? (Score:3, Insightful)
They need to move fast, clean VP8 up and push it into Chrome, Android and youtube
And then Android battery life starts horribly suffering due to lack of hardware support. Sounds like a winning idea!
Re:Google is the key here (Score:4, Informative)
That plan just happened to slip his mind when he shipped iPhones and iPads with built-in Youtube support, then?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There are hundreds of simple games for free on the AppStore. This is not about paying. This is about platform control. Whomever controls the dominant development platform is in a better position to compete.
Going after Open Source is not a winning strategy (Score:4, Insightful)
Unlike other community things, it actually works and people will defend it, because they are using what they write themselves. Go after Open Source and you are basically dead, even when it may take you a long time dying. The time to play games of greed and power with software are over. This stuff is critical infrastructure, everybody needs it and it has to be both good quality and readily available. Open Source can do that. No other approach can. And this becomes harder and harder to ignore.
Good things could come of this (Score:5, Insightful)
Jobs is partly correct and part incorrect.
When he says "All video codecs are covered by patents" he is incorrect. Patents are limited by their claims and it is completely possible that there is a codec that does not fall under any patents. One such codec, the null codec that simply turns every input bit into itself, is probably free of any patents. Of course that would be a silly codec.
Just because something is open source does not mean that it does not infringe on one or more patents. A lot of folks confuse "copyright", which protects expression, with patent, which protects ideas. Under patent even an independent expression (an implementation), even an open source one, might impinge on a patented idea.
I suspect that pretty much everybody here, including myself, is of the belief that patents have been granted that are overbroad, that live too long, and that are simply reflective of prior or obvious practice that existed at or prior to the time of the patent filing. There is much that is broken in the patent system.
I can readily believe that ogg/theora might impinge on some patent in some country. Then again it might not. And whether that patent is itself valid is a question that would have to be answered once we knew what those putative patents were.
Since proving that something like ogg/theora doesn't infringe is like proving a negative, it is pretty hard to ever say that something is provably and undeniably free of patents.
But it would, in my opinion, be a good thing to have the matter fully debated in the context of a lawsuit. It would create a forum where the H.264 people (and other patent-codec people) could duke it out with the open source codec community in a place where we could get some definitive answers that ratchet and lock into place and thus give guidance to us in the future.
If Ogg/theora (or Google's VP8) violates a patent it is better to know it now so that we can work around the patent or obtain blanket community licenses.
My own guess is that if the Apple or the MPEG people engage in something more than sabre rattling that they will find the open source community a resourceful and dedicated opponent. Most particularly, the open source community is probably a very formidable opponent on the question of whether that patent on which the claim of infringement is based is itself valid.
Apple and the MPEG people could find that at the end of the battle that their own patents have fallen.
While I might not agree with his wordage... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems more like a conjecture on his part (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think it's Apple who's assembling this set of patents. The lawsuit WILL happen sooner or later, inevitably. If Apple started distributing Theora, this lawsuit would happen within a month, even though they're in MPEG LA. Who knows what their contract with MPEG LA says, too. They might lose the right to distribute h264 as a consequence.
I understand SJ on this one, even if I think his "thoughts on flash" are utter and complete bullshit for the most part.
Does he know something we don't? (Score:3, Funny)
Bubbe, I probably know a lot you don't.
When does MPEG1 become free and clear? (Score:3, Insightful)
I know it sucks by modern standards, but the claim that "all video codecs are covered by patents" is a bold one to make - surely MPEG 1 is either at or close to the end of its patent life (at least in the US)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-1 [wikipedia.org]
Steve's shine seems to be dulling (Score:3, Funny)
Did someone destroy Basil Hallward's painting of him?
Apple is evil (Score:5, Insightful)
I've often made the argument that Apple is far more evil than Microsoft in terms of pursuing vendor lock-in and coercively leveraging one product in order to drive sales of others to the detriment of real competition; the only thing that held Apple back was that it blew the marketing battle against Wintel a long time ago. Now that their fortunes are on the rise again, we can reasonably expect to see Apple flex its muscles in ways that are just as insidious as Microsoft during its rise to dominance. This being one of those occasions, I'll say it again: Apple was innocuous for so long because they simply didn't have the market share to abuse their customers (much).
Now, for the other half of this endless loop, I'll yield the floor and let the usual crowd of Mac fanboys explain to us how Apple's predatory stance towards Open Source is really insanely great. (And really, this should be a great occasion for nostalgia, since the release of the iPad gives Apple fans the first chance they've had in several years to argue that preemptive multitasking -- or, in this case, any multitasking -- is actually a good thing.)
They've nearly always been more evil (Score:3, Insightful)
Every since they were the "Jobs" Apple. Initially, Apple was the "Woz" Apple. Products centered around what he, as a geek, liked. Jobs just marketed them (and marketed them well I might add). However that lasted only until around the mid 80s. Then the "Jobs" Apple took over.
Well that Apple has always been about control, about lock in. They want to tell you what you are going to do on your computer. When you want more power, they want you to throw it away and buy a new one. They will tell you what technologi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not the first time this scenario has happened - frankly it feels a great deal like the days of the early Macs.
I recall the first Mac I ever saw - I was in high school and a friend had just purchased one (upgrading his Apple IIe), I do not recall which Mac it was but was the top of the line at the time. All of us oohed an ahhed over it. Indeed, it was one of the slickest things I had ever seen. I wanted one so bad I couldn't stand it but I (even with my parents help) just could not afford one so I settl
A response from Xiph's Greg Maxwell (Score:5, Informative)
Here's the perspective of Greg Maxwell from Xiph on Steve Jobs' claims:
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/2010-April/003769.html [xiph.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apple dropped ZFS from Snow Leopard because they were worried about getting sued by NetApp, so there's some merit to the argument that Apple may simply be avoiding a lawsuit.
Google supports Theora development, and Google is a pretty juicy target, too... so it doesn't quite add up there.
The place I do think it does add up is simple: MPEG is an ISO standard, and H.264 is also an ITU standard. It has very broad support and many, many implementations.
Ogg more or less a self-proclaimed standard, with much of i
Ready, fire, aim! (Score:3, Informative)
I can't believe what I'm reading here today. The video codec "war" is over; Google doesn't really even have a horse in the race. Apple devices support H.264 and Microsoft is putting it into the next IE version. Between Apple and Microsoft that covers an overwhelming majority of the video players and that's what any sensible web site will be using to encode their video files.
VP8 may be very cool and Theora is nice, too. But see the above and realize that even if all of the "me too" web browsers use open source codecs exclusively they'll insure that they'll remain a "me too" browser. I'm sure that the Firefox users here (like me) have noticed the (still) large number of web sites that are reduced in function or unusable to that browser. If those sites can't even be troubled to write HTML that works on all browsers, what makes anyone think they'll maintain multiple copies (encoded in multiple formats) of each video file so that when some uncommon / open source web browser comes along it'll be able to view the videos? Even mighty Google isn't in a position where they can force a video codec on us.
If open source zealots want to engage in battles like this, they need to pick their battles better. And those intellectually dishonest postings trying to blame Apple for the way things are don't serve anyone. Put some of that time and effort into making a difference instead, OK?
Here's something to think about: is it possible to write a codec that plays H.264 files without infringing any patents? Don't assume it's impossible - it could very well be possible and that could lead to an open source codec that is compatible with what the big boys use. That's a worthy goal; who's going to give it a try?
Re:Sensationalism (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sensationalism (Score:5, Insightful)
Everybody loves the manual prices, codec prices, lock in cash flow feel and Theora "like" lock out.
Apple, Real, MS ect all seem to want a codec to lock in developers and milk them at some workflow level eg. color correction, production software ect.
The idea that some free blog could set you up with a "good enough" Linux/Mac/Win guide to shoot 720/1080 HD media, edit, encode it and give/broadcast/sell to the world is just wrong to Apple, MS ect.
You should be buying Apple or MS low end software, learning via student discounts and then walking in and buying $1000 to 10000+ worth of software to start and then think about itunes ect to sell your art.
Theora is the main threat to this. People have the creativity, low end HD cams, friends, a codec and the web.
Nothing is stopping them from bypassing Apple, Hollywood, MS ect. and going to the consumer except a good free codec for real world web "sharing".
You still need a CC system for payments
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree 100%. Those days are coming fast, thanks to the reduced energy requirements of adding more cores compared to more complex cores. Video is one of those things that is comparatively easily parallelized. And bandwidth is getting better and better, cheaper and cheaper. 1 ghz to the curb is a reasonable goal for 2020. And considering that the average home probably has over a terabyte of storage right now, a petabyte by 2020 is probably a very conservative estimate.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This isn't about Xiph ... this is about Google.
Apple is in a very similar position as Microsoft was a while ago, and they are using the EXACT same playbook ... FUD.
Attacking Theora is an attack on Google how exactly?
Re:Sensationalism (Score:5, Interesting)
All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other “open source” codecs now
(emphasis mine)
Google recently acquired On2 [arstechnica.com] and plans to Open Source the VP8 codec [arstechnica.com].
Re:I look forward to contributing to the fund (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like Microsoft hasn't sued anybody over the supposed patent violations in Linux.
Possibly for similar reasons. FUD is cheaper and easier to generate than a lawsuit that won't get thrown out of court, and maybe even get you sanctioned.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You raise a valid point, except for as alluded to in my post, Steve Jobs/Apple does not own the patents in question. Your analogy would be correct if Apple owned the patents.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Don't settle for being 99% sure - go and check:
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/PatentList.aspx
Apple owns one patent licensed through the h264 pool, "Using order value for processing a video picture", US 7,292,636.
No jump to see he's trying to suppress competition (Score:3, Informative)
Looks to me, Steve Jobs just knows there are people looking into suing Theora. Not Steve Jobs (or Apple) is going to sue Theora.
Even if that's the case he made the announcement in the form of a FUD attack on Theora and the other open source CODECs.
Now lots of potential adopters will instead be waiting for the other shoe to drop before considering an open source solution - and paying for proprietary stuff meanwhile. And if the shoe never drops they'll wait, and pay, a very long time. This is the magic of F
Re:That Steve was a nice fellow once... (Score:5, Informative)
Steve jobs has NEVER been a nice fellow. :)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The porn industry chooses its standards. Everyone else follows.
It's interesting how often this myth gets repeated. If anything, the porn industry went with HD DVD in the high definition disc format wars. And we all know how well that worked out:
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/01/8602.ars [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I know how the next codec standard will be chos (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As noted in the summary, the patent holders seem keen to insinuate that you simply can't do video codecs without infringing on their patents, without actually saying so plainly.
As noted in the summary, Jobs says 'a patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other "open source" codecs now' - and I read "go after" as "attack", because that's what it is.
Perhaps if we didn't allow asshats to decide they can control the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to burst your bubble ..
- Apple has no significant H. 264 license and has no grounds to sue anyone related to Theora. Apple is saying they know litigation is pending by a 3rd party.
- Apple permits writers and publishers the ability to set their own eBook prices. The market defines the prices.
- The Apple engineer who lost the iPhone remains employed by Apple.
- Flash sucks right, we all agree to that, we all think it should die? Apple starts 'battling it' and it's evil?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Would work if the patent office was competent. They're not; they're happy to accept multiple patents on the same thing (there were at least two LZW patents, and run length encoding has been patented many times).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're legally prohibited from implementing H.264 except with permission of the people who own it. That's about as proprietary as something can possibly get.
If there was a codec with no documentation whatsoever, just binary-only implementations - that could still be more open than H.264, because the only obstacle to implementing it would be one's ability to reverse engineer the binaries, rather than one's ability to fight off the police.