LGPL VP6 decoder released - Page 5

Sharktooth · 5th April 2006, 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by madman1980

I really hope a future version of ffdshow will include this. I can't stand having to install several codecs...

if you read the whole thread you would have known that code is ILLEGAL.

bond · 5th April 2006, 20:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharktooth

if you read the whole thread you would have known that code is ILLEGAL.

depends propably on the country you are in

(also you could try to pay on2 licenses for using their patents

)

lrms · 6th April 2006, 02:16

I think we must separate two things:

1) Decompiling/disassembling the code itself (what is some dirty sort of reverse-engineer)
2) "Black box" reverse-engineering (i.e. playing with something to see how it works, but without "breaking" it)

The first tries to extract the code from the binaries, even if it's only assembly it could be used to build another program.

The second can use the binary to see what comes out when something comes in, but is stop there, the contents of the binaries are otherwise untouched.

I believe the first is clearly illegal in most countries, but the second should be perfectly legal.

IMHO it seems the license only prohibits the first (messing with their code).

My $.02

rjamorim · 11th April 2006, 02:46

http://www.rarewares.org/index.html

Anyone surprised?

dimzon · 11th April 2006, 08:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjamorim

http://www.rarewares.org/index.html

Anyone surprised?

Quote:

Sticking to its good old tradition of hosting controversial stuff, RareWares is hosting the recently released LGPLd sources to an On2 VP6 video decoder. On2 is strongly stomping on anyone hosting the sources without providing any legal proof that it indeed belongs to them and that it isn't a fair and legal reverse engineering effort. Fortunately, RareWares doesn't have a tendency of believing in FUD...

what does FUD mean

celtic_druid · 11th April 2006, 09:15

Quote:

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) is a sales or marketing strategy of disseminating negative and vague or inaccurate information on a competitor's product. The term originated to describe misinformation tactics in the computer hardware industry and has since been used more broadly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FUD

Basically ON2 have people believing that the code is illegal without providing anything close to proof.

As for "purportedly serves to decode On2 VP6 streams". The test player worked fine when I tried it on a VP6 FLV file.

rjamorim · 11th April 2006, 10:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by celtic_druid

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FUD

Basically ON2 have people believing that the code is illegal without providing anything close to proof.

Right. If they provide some sort of proof that the code is indeed ©On2, I'll take it offline, after all, RareWares doesn't want to get involved in theft. But, honestly, for all that it matters, it seems to me they have been just vague about the ownership of that code so far.

Quote:

As for "purportedly serves to decode On2 VP6 streams". The test player worked fine when I tried it on a VP6 FLV file.

Ah, interesting! Thanks for the information. I updated the page accordingly.

Maybe I should contact mr. "Zeitoun Padli" for further information. Does anyone have his e-mail address, by any chance?

Edit: nevermind, I found his e-mail on Sourceforge
http://sourceforge.net/users/ztoon-padli/

celtic_druid · 11th April 2006, 11:34

You are of course welcome to mirror the binary I compiled to if you want. Could also update mpeg4ip, etc. if they are still old versions.

rjamorim · 11th April 2006, 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by celtic_druid

You are of course welcome to mirror the binary I compiled to if you want. Could also update mpeg4ip, etc. if they are still old versions.

MPEG4ip is indeed sadly outdated. I shall take care of these tonight, when I return home.

Thank-you very much

videomixer9 · 11th April 2006, 12:04

Isn't ffdshow and xvid also illegal in the US? at least as a free binary download without acquiring licenses for the used codecs? Just remember how popular US-based Linux distributions didn't even include MP3 support (fedora, redhat).

rjamorim · 11th April 2006, 12:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by videomixer9

Isn't ffdshow and xvid also illegal in the US? at least as a free binary download without acquiring licenses for the used codecs? Just remember how popular US-based Linux distributions didn't even include MP3 support (fedora, redhat).

It's illegal in a whole different way, so it's sort of legal. Dig it?

The problem with ffdshow and xvid is patent infrigement. The (alleged) problem with libvp62 is copyright infrigement. While distributing patented stuff without paying license fees is problematic, distributing copyrighted stuff without permission from the righs owner is considered plain theft.

videomixer9 · 11th April 2006, 12:17

So why post that here, now you got no excuse anymore about not knowing that it may be stolen. Patent infrigement or theft, in both cases you know that it is not really legal you shouldn't use it anymore if you were honest. After all they stole the ideas from the original inventor with the patents, technically almost the same, except that the stealing an idea concept is not accepted in many countries, for a good reason too.

Just host it in China, China still doesn't have copyright laws iirc. :O same trick as with the patents ...

rjamorim · 11th April 2006, 12:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by videomixer9

So why post that here, now you got no excuse anymore about not knowing that it may be stolen.

Key word there is "may".

Quote:

Patent infrigement or theft, in both cases you know that it is not really legal you shouldn't use it anymore if you were honest.

Who said I'm infriging their patents? Is it patented even? And even if it is, they never sent me any e-mail asking for patent fees. Distributing patented stuff is actually legal as long as the patent owner isn't collecting licensing fees. That's why I said distributing patented stuff is problematic, but not illegal.

dragongodz · 11th April 2006, 13:01

Quote:

Isn't ffdshow and xvid also illegal in the US? at least as a free binary download without acquiring licenses for the used codecs?

i wont comment on ffdshow but xvid binaries are not illegal. you are allowed to distribute up to 50,000 before you have to pay royalties to the mpegla. this HAS been discussed in the past many times.

Code:

http://www.mpegla.com/m4v/m4v-faq.cfm

EDIT:
if you want to discuss things about xvid then its section of the forum is the place to really do it. after searching first of course.

rjamorim · 14th April 2006, 01:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by celtic_druid

You are of course welcome to mirror the binary I compiled to if you want. Could also update mpeg4ip, etc. if they are still old versions.

I am now hosting your binary there, and updated MPEG4ip as well. Thank-you very much!

Sirber · 15th April 2006, 14:32

@rjamorim

Any legal letters yet?

rjamorim · 15th April 2006, 16:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirber

@rjamorim

Any legal letters yet?

Surprisingly enough, no. Neither to me, or to the people that are helping me host the noise chains. That probably means that they either don't care anymore, or got convinced that noise chain makes things harder on them to go C&D servers, or (less likely) they didn't notice what RareWares is doing yet.

Sirber · 15th April 2006, 19:49

I looked at your NoiseChain tool, and the java only "download". How can I make one?

rjamorim · 15th April 2006, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirber

I looked at your NoiseChain tool, and the java only "download". How can I make one?

Just run the app from the command line ($ java -jar nchain.jar) and the option to make chains will appear. Basicly, you need to feed it the file that will be turned into a chain and a txt file containing a list of urls, one per line, where each part of the chain will be stored.

rjamorim · 18th April 2006, 19:45

Let's get the ball rolling, shall we?

Quote:

Dear Mr. Amorim:

The letter below was sent on April 12 to Mr. Edwards, but we now understand that you are also responsible for the rarewares.com site. Please understand the urgency of this matter and act to remove the code.

Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail communication and any action taken.

Thank you,

George Brieger
Levisohn, Berger & Langsam LLP
805 Third Avenue, 19th Floor
New York, New York 10022
Tel: (212) 486-7272 Ext. 311
Fax: (212) 486-0323
www.LLBL.com

April 12, 2006
Subject: Copyright Violation on rarewares.org

Dear Sir or Madam:

This firm represents On2 Technologies Inc. in connection with intellectual property and related matters. On2 owns a proprietary decoder called VP6.2, which has been copied, reverse engineered and posted to and published on your website at

http://www.rarewares.org

On2 has devoted considerable resources and software developer hours on the VP 6.2 project. Based on our client's preliminary comparison of the posted code with VP6.2, there appear to be substantial similarities in design elements and structure. Accordingly, On2's copyright in VP6.2 is infringed. To the extent this is the case, you are in violation of DMCA and provisions of international copyright law.

Moreover, the user licensee that is agreed to when accessing VP 6.2 from On2 Technologies provides, in relevant part, that:

"You may NOT:
1...
2...
3. reverse engineer, de-compile, disassemble, modify, translate, make
any attempt to discover the source code or resources of the Software or
create derivative works based on the Software;"

Accordingly, the person who posted the VP6.2 code on your site breached his agreement with On2 by reverse engineering VP6.2 and posted unlawful content to your site.

We have contacted other websites that were posting our client's code, and the sites immediately removed the code in response to our report.

Therefore, we insist that you immediately remove the code from your website and from all backup maintenance systems and mirror sites available to the public. Your continued dissemination on your website is causing irreparable harm to On2 because any number of unknown parties is likely to download and use the code, and every moment that it is posted is increasing the damages. The damage in this instance is irreparable, and you must remove the code from its site to stop its participation in damaging On2. Time is of the essence.

Should you have any questions, please contact me. Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail and any action taken by replying to me.

Very truly yours,
LEVISOHN, BERGER & LANGSAM LLP

Peter L. Berger

Peter L. Berger, Esq.
Levisohn, Berger & Langsam LLP
805 Third Avenue, 19th Floor
New York, New York 10022
pberger@LLBL.com
Tel: (212) 486-7272 Ext. 309
Fax: (212) 486-0323
www.LLBL.com

**************************************************************************
Notice: This message is intended only for use by the named addressee and may contain privileged and / or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited: please delete all electronic copies of this message and its attachments, destroy and hard copies you may have created and notify me immediately. Thank You

God, I love living in South America.

The part teat cracked me up the most is the DMCA bit. I'll comment further on this letter (and reply to Herr Berger) later, as I am at work right now. God bless this mess.

6th April 2006, 02:16	#83 \| Link
lrms Registered User Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: RS, Brasil Posts: 50	Reverse engineering I think we must separate two things: 1) Decompiling/disassembling the code itself (what is some dirty sort of reverse-engineer) 2) "Black box" reverse-engineering (i.e. playing with something to see how it works, but without "breaking" it) The first tries to extract the code from the binaries, even if it's only assembly it could be used to build another program. The second can use the binary to see what comes out when something comes in, but is stop there, the contents of the binaries are otherwise untouched. I believe the first is clearly illegal in most countries, but the second should be perfectly legal. IMHO it seems the license only prohibits the first (messing with their code). My $.02

11th April 2006, 02:46	#84 \| Link
rjamorim Blah! Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Brazil Posts: 337	http://www.rarewares.org/index.html Anyone surprised? __________________ Get latest LAME, Vorbis and more binaries at RareWares: http://www.rarewares.org

15th April 2006, 14:32	#96 \| Link
Sirber retired developer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 8,978	@rjamorim Any legal letters yet? __________________ Detritus Software

15th April 2006, 19:49	#98 \| Link
Sirber retired developer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 8,978	I looked at your NoiseChain tool, and the java only "download". How can I make one? __________________ Detritus Software

11th April 2006, 11:34	#88 \| Link
celtic_druid Registered User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,171	You are of course welcome to mirror the binary I compiled to if you want. Could also update mpeg4ip, etc. if they are still old versions.

11th April 2006, 12:04	#90 \| Link
videomixer9 ffdshow fan Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 580	Isn't ffdshow and xvid also illegal in the US? at least as a free binary download without acquiring licenses for the used codecs? Just remember how popular US-based Linux distributions didn't even include MP3 support (fedora, redhat).

11th April 2006, 12:17	#92 \| Link
videomixer9 ffdshow fan Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 580	So why post that here, now you got no excuse anymore about not knowing that it may be stolen. Patent infrigement or theft, in both cases you know that it is not really legal you shouldn't use it anymore if you were honest. After all they stole the ideas from the original inventor with the patents, technically almost the same, except that the stealing an idea concept is not accepted in many countries, for a good reason too. Just host it in China, China still doesn't have copyright laws iirc. :O same trick as with the patents ...