Hello, I was discussing on the mplayer/mencoder ML about transcodingfrom Divx to Theora. I got these kind of answers: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mencoder.user/280 Of course I understoud only 50% of what he said, as well as I am not really used with codec and video glossary... But I generally understoud his opinion. What to think? I would like not to believe him, espacially when he assumes Theora is as "good" as MPEG-1... so... -- Get a fully managed dedicated server for ?150/month ($200/month) No time limit for taking care of your server. You keep the "root" acces if you want. Billing periods are 3 months. See the conditions at http://aspo.rktmb.org/activities/managed_servers
Rakotomandimby (R12y) Mihamina wrote:> But I generally understoud his opinion. What to think? I would like not > to believe him, espacially when he assumes Theora is as "good" as > MPEG-1... so...Most of this wrong. a) Xiph never claimed that Theora is patent-free. It is not patent free. However, On2 granted an *unrevocable free license* to all patents that cover VP3 technology. There are no other patent claims known - and On2 is fairly well known name in the video codec industry. Xiph never lied about Theora's patent. It's this guy that lies by claiming the contrary. b) VP3 performs much better than MPEG 1. I don't know where people get those strange ideas that VP3 is only comparable to MPEG 1. Maik
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Markus Meyer wrote:> Ole Tange schrieb: > > >So the quote: "Virtually every single patented algorithm used in mpeg* > >codecs is also used in theora." is correct. > > Yes, but that's about the only quote from that mail that's correct.On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Ralph Giles wrote:> It is not correct. If this were the case we could not claim theora was > freely implementable, and there would indeed be no point to the project.So?! What is it? Would it be possible to construct an answer that both you and Richard Felker III <dalias@aerifal.cx> can agree on?> No, as Maik stated, there are no known patent claims on theora beyond > the ones On2 has already granted a license on. Theora very carefully > does things differently from the mpeg video codecs, just as vorbis does > things differently from the audio codecs.It would be interesting if Richard could point to a couple of patents that he believes Theora infringes - even if the patents are stupid.> On2 is not a member of the MPEG consortium and has no patents listed in > the MPEG LA licensing pool. The fact that they continue to do business > selling competing video compression technology is good evidence that the > holders of the MPEG video patents agree with this assessment.So because MPEG-LA do not go after On2 (who make money of the same technology) we assume that their case is weak/non-existent? /Ole -- See the Patented Word Processor http://ole.tange.dk/swpat/
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:49:46PM +0100, Rakotomandimby (R12y) Mihamina wrote:> Hello, > > I was discussing on the mplayer/mencoder ML about transcodingfrom Divx > to Theora. I got these kind of answers: > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mencoder.user/280 > > Of course I understoud only 50% of what he said, as well as I am not > really used with codec and video glossary... > > But I generally understoud his opinion. What to think? I would like not > to believe him, espacially when he assumes Theora is as "good" as > MPEG-1... so...He's basically just more emphatic about his heresay. Some of his basic facts are right, eg, "the Theora codec is in the same basic family of encoders as MPEG4", but then to go on and say "so it must infringe on MPEG 4 patents" is incorrect. Also "It is based on VP3" is entirely true. "It is nothing but VP3 with a different name" is not. His logic only seems to make sense because you don't know what he's talking about... on the other hand, neither does he. Monty