similar to: Patents and GPL (was: Re: PlusV)

Important (imho)! I found this site in the internet: http://www.plusv.org/ PlusV is an audio enhancement algorithm similar to SRB of Mp3Pro, but 1) better than SBR 2) Fully open-source It seems to me wise to include PlusV into new versions of Ogg Vorbis. P.S. what about some long-awaited features in Ogg Vorbis? 1) ability to turn off the frequency filter in the encoder (especially for high

Hi, I haven't seen this mentioned here before. http://www.plusv.org/ "With traditional MP3, a typical Near CD Quality audio file has been encoded with a data rate of 128 kbits/s. While this is ok for people with big hard disks and fast Internet connections, this data speed has clearly been a bottleneck for people using modems or storing their music into 32 or 64 MB portable player

I hate following up to myself, but I thought a clarification of one point (specifically WRT RC5 which was mentioned in the original question) might be worthwhile...because what I should have said originally was that "To the best of my non-legally- admissible knowledge, however, none of the algorithms in the current *OpenSSH* implementation are currently encumbered by patents that would

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

Sunil-- Actually, you do not "see that openssl has some patent issues." You do see that OpenSSL implements many algorithms, some of which have been (at various times) been patented or encumbered in some countries. Without knowing what country you're in, none of us here can really give useful advice as to which software/algorithm patents could potentially apply. To the best of my

The specific standards process used to develop the MPEG codecs creates patent minefields that royalty-free codecs don't generally face. Because many knowledgeable people have heard of the problems faced by these patent-soup standards, they may extrapolate these risk to codecs developed under a different process where these problems are less considerable. This is a mistake, and I'll explain

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

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 6:34 AM, Andrew Joakimsen <joakimsen at gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Tilghman Lesher > <tilghman at mail.jeffandtilghman.com> wrote: >> It is completely illegal in any country that recognizes patents. > > You mean countries that recognize software patents, right? As resident of country where the file is hosted - yes we

Hello, So here is the compression scheme that I don't know if is covered by patent. I use it on the wavelet DC parts.It outputs 1 byte (8 bits) words.There is 5 modes: - 1(MSB) | 7 bits to store value (0->127 range) - 01 | 6 bits to store val[n+1]-val[n] | val[n]-val[n-1] if each in the range [-4,4] - 001 | 5 bits to store val[n+2]-val[n+1] | val[n+1]-val[n] | val[n]-val[n-1] if each in

> > > > 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

Patenting a mathematical formula is NOT creating a machine nor is it unique. For example. 2+2=4... apples + apples^2= given outcome. I want to patent this. It's stupid to patent something like that. The same is true for formula algorithms. Algorithms occur in nature. Thus should not be patented. Now, Volley G Mathison inventor of the Electropsychometer had a machine that he could patent. A

Hello, Ok, and that's too many work to review a source code.In my codec, I have 3 compression schemes, I think 2 are not patented, but the third... I don't know.For the rest, I think my codec is patent-free (I don't use SPIHT,EZW,zerotree methods), even the wavelet transform is new and don't use the lifting scheme nor the convolution product. Else, if you found time to review the

The list probably did not get this reply from D Richard Felker III. Having read quite a few patents I tend to agree with Richard: Software patents are very broad and even if I have not read the source code of Theora I would be surprised if it did not infringe several patents. However, I believe the argument that On2 has not been sued for infringing the MPEG-patents is a very strong argument.

AFAIK g729 patent is expiring sometime in 2019-2020. Mitul Limbani On Feb 8, 2017 5:02 AM, "Victor Villarreal" <mefhigoseth at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > I understand your question and your point, but I use the g729 codec from > the link that Carlos share, for almost 6 years from Asterisk 1.4 to v13 > without a single problem. > > So, sory but I

Hi folks, I was curious what's known about the patent situation with the DV format. Google turns up a number of press articles describing it as an "open standard with no associated licensing fees" but also, for example, US Patent number 5,691,81 which, while I've not done a careful comparison of the claims, sounds like it covers the block-rearrangement scheme that's the

Just a question about the state of Vorbis, if I build an application using Ogg is there a chance anyone sue me to death due to some stupid patent violation. Is the method used in the Vorbis compression, decompression and streams free of any patent violations? *** Frank M. Siegert, frank<at>this.net, frank<at>wizards.de *** WWW @ http://www.this.net/~frank * http://www.wizards.de

> Take a look at: > > http://swpat.ffii.org/patents/effects/voip/index.en.html Well, outside of the Speex link, that page seems to be pretty old... > Is speex realy petant free or does patent free only means that > is is not patent by the speex authors? Who have checked that > speex doesn't violates patents others? I don't use IP here, > because most patents are

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 >

The H.264 codec patent by Qualcomm has been ruled invalid by a San Diego Federal jury: http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197001066 . That means that H.264 codecs can now be written, distributed and revised freely under any license their authors choose, including GPL, public domain, or any other, and $free now that royalties are no longer required. How does H.264

I suppose it could be possible to patent something and let the patent expire so that it is registered at the patent office but not enforcable. No one else could patent it then. I get curious about the RLE patent. I heard Someone has a patent on run length encoding and I wonder how long they have had it because I remember RLE code running on a sinclair spectrum in the 80's before the whole