similar to: Patent situation of Vorbis?

> > > > I’m still not completely convinced by this argument, given that the > majority of patent lawsuits come from NPEs. That is not necessarily where the majority of patent lawsuit *danger* comes from, and i'd argue, pretty strongly, it's not the most likely case for LLVM. > We’d still be in the situation where a malicious contributor could: > > 1. Spin up a

Hi everyone, first of all, I searched through the archives for any posts resembling this, I didn't read all posts about the patents so if this has been suggested before I apologise. I read in an article on C|Net (I think, it was linked from Slashdot anyway) that Thompson are threatening to sue you if Ogg Vorbis becomes a success. Which is evil, and I'm also mad at them because they never

Does the reason Theora is relatively safe from patent infringement lawsuit have more to do with it actually not being encumbered, or is it because its use is decentralized? For example, FreeType is not patent-free, nor is Linux, yet they succeed because on the one hand, they are open source, and those who maintain them do not guarantee anything regarding patents, it is up to each individual user

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:03 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: > On 3 Nov 2016, at 14:50, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > >> In particular, various corporate lawyers were worried about this > scenario that neuters defensive patents): > > Lawyers see risk everywhere, so i'll just go with "various corporate >

Hi, We are in the business of developing/productizing Multimedia codecs for embedded systems. Recently, Vorbis has gained good popularity. We are also developing it. But we face few problems related to patents. Vorbis claims to be patent free. Is there any particular search made for possible patent infringements and corresponding report published? We need to convince our customers sometime

Hi David, Sorry for the delay getting back to you, been a bit buried: On Oct 19, 2015, at 10:12 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: >> The TL;DR version of this is that I think we should discuss relicensing all of LLVM under the Apache 2.0 license and add a runtime exception clause. See below for a lot more details. > > I agree that this is a problem.

Hi everyone. Reading all this posts about patent issues, I thought of something: if, by some wild chance FhG (or some other audio company) manages to prove in court that vorbis is breaking their patent rights, you could do something like LAME developers did: release only source code and let people do the compiling so that only users that are living in countries where patents on algorithms are

Hi everyone. Reading all this posts about patent issues, I thought of something: if, by some wild chance FhG (or some other audio company) manages to prove in court that vorbis is breaking their patent rights, you could do something like LAME developers did: release only source code and let people do the compiling so that only users that are living in countries where patents on algorithms are

Hi radeonhd, nouveau, mesa3d developers, Firstly, thank you all very much for all the important work you do. I've been working as a part-time developer on the "Spring RTS" project (open-source game engine) which runs on linux (and other os). Some time ago I tried the engine on the open-source ATI radeonhd driver, which I understand to be partly based on mesa 3d, and all textures

> On Nov 1, 2016, at 12:21 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 09:16:47AM -0700, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev wrote: >> The goals of this effort are outlined in the previous email but, in short, we aim to: >> - encourage ongoing contributions to LLVM by preserving low barrier to entry for contributors.

Not related to Vorbis, but it shows how software patents can be abused to the point where it becomes absurd... http://www.idg.net/ic_316584_1794_1-483.html BTW I used a hyperlink here... BT can sue me... ;-) Greetings, Aleksandar --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to

Sprint Nextel is sueing vonage, voiceglo and theglobe.com for infringing on VoIP patents. Sprint Nextel claims to have about 100 patents on VoIP technologies. Does anyone know which ones this article is talking about, and if so does asterisk have any of those features? The reason I am asking is that the article is vague, Vonage uses a fairly standard codec set, I dont know about the others.

Hello everyone, This email is a continuation of a discussion started in October 2015, and continued in September 2016: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-October/091536.html http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2016-September/104778.html As with those emails, this is a complicated topic and deals with sensitive legal issues. I am not a lawyer, and this email is not intended to be

Craig Dickson (crdic@yahoo.com) wrote : > Jack Moffitt wrote: > > > I agree that this might be the case. But what happens with the > > violation is by the author? :) > > > > Ie, in the case of PlusV releasing a patented codec under the GPL or in > > the case of LAME or FreeType's authors doing similar things. What > > state is that? > >

On Oct 19, 2015, at 10:53 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg at britannica.bec.de> wrote: >>>> 2) We could require new contributors to sign the Apache CLA. >>> >>> To me, this is the most acceptable option of the listed terms. >> >> Please explain: why? > > First part for me is that switching the code to a different license > doesn't

Here in the uk, to get a patent on anything, you have to prove that the patent is not obvious and that there is no prior art. If there is prior art, then a patent cannot be given, this is why people patenting stuff have to keep it a secret until they actually have the patent, otherwise it is considered to have been released into the public domain. Once something is in the public domain, nobody

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 9:27 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 08:25:16AM -0700, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev wrote: >> 1) We could introduce a novel legal solution. > > Please, no. > >> 2) We could require new contributors to sign the Apache CLA. > > To me, this is the most acceptable

I know Tarkin is not the priority right now, but when it becomes it's good to know which company might feel nervous... ------------------------------------------ Compaq sued for alleged patent violations By Bloomberg News November 20, 2000, 5:30 a.m. PT WILMINGTON, Del.--Compaq Computer, the world's biggest personal computer maker, has been sued by a group for allegedly infringing

Hi everybody, As the Asterisk community is getting larger and larger, I was wondering that the features which are provided in Asterisk and are programmed by the open source community under GPL, or GUIs like FreePBX which also come loaded with wonderful features and uses same Asterisk, are they anywhere violating any patent laws? Most of the features work the same way as Nortel, Avaya and other

Hi all, <p>i have readed all the realy sad stuff about software patents in europe and what allread exists. There is one side related to speex and i dont know if this is allready discussed here. Take a look at: http://swpat.ffii.org/patents/effects/voip/index.en.html Is speex realy petant free or does patent free only means that is is not patent by the speex authors? Who have checked that