LGPL VP6 decoder released - Page 13

Doom9 · 30th April 2006, 00:18

Quote:

Doom9, have you received any emails or letters

No I have not. But then again I have not been hosting the material in question either and there's no working link to a libvp62 in this thread as far as my search goes. I have had a look at libvp62 and the results of jad but first of all it's a video codec so there's lots of maths to give me a headache (I've had more than my share at college and I'm extremely glad not having to worry about matrices, integrals, differentials, probability calculations and the likes on a daily basis anymore.. I never quite liked that stuff), and it's not like you can make any reasonable judgement without at least trying to understand how the code works.. and I just don't have the time and motivation to do so.

Since the cat's out of the bag either way, what's the harm in posting how libvp62 resembles On2's java code? Say you go to court, at the very latest at this point that information is going to leak anyway.. just as Groklaw is reporting everything on the SCO cases.

rjamorim · 30th April 2006, 03:38

You guys are all nuts, but in a nice sort of way

Well, I decided to compromise. Not because On2 ever contacted me in reasonable terms (they didn't, all they did was to brandish the DMCA as some soft of Mighty Sword of Destruction +5), but because I discussed this a lot with Liisachan and we came to conclusions that seem to be the best to all parties. Liisachan is smart and reasonable. On2 are <censored> that lost whatever modicum of respect I had for them due to that old VP3 thing.

So, the compromise is: I'll stop hosting the sources but I'll keep hosting the directshow filter and demo decoder. The directshow filter is much more useful than sources for the vast majority of users out there anyway. And I'm considering linking to other binaries using libVP62 (I know of one being worked on as we speak) at RareWares as well.

Should be enough for everyone. If it isn't... tough luck. I have more valuable stuff to worry about anyway.

Best regards (to the good guys

)

Roberto.

Edit: these changes will only appear on RW tomorrow (sunday)

Liisachan · 30th April 2006, 07:03

@On2Tech
I refrained from posting anything here to make sure you can have a good weekend, but since I've been named...
What I actually did was sending 2 PMs to rjamorim, costing a few minutes and like 10 minutes respectively. Rjamorim is giving me too much credit.

Here's 2 things I wanted to say to you:
(1) You said "I accept that the JAVA binary is out there and cannot be put back into the bag so to speak" which is true too. But accepting that .jar being around, is practically giving anyone the same (or the similar) thing than libvp62. Any good programmers (not me) can decompile it and re-implement it easily. So, how about considering what Sharktooth, smok3 and others suggested? If this goes on, there will be buggy VP62 decoders out there (you said that code contained a bug which was fixed later). Buggy decoders could unfairly damage the reputation of VP62. This already happened in the relationship between LQ Tremor decoder in ffdshow and Ogg Vorbis. I'm sure many users who use ffdshow's def Vorbis decoder without a 2nd thought assume that Vorbis is not so good. Which is really frustrating, because it's not Vorbis' fault...

(2) I'd like to support anyone who might create an alternative for AVC/VC-1. Many said they started disliking On2 because of this mess, but I won't. I once got unmotivated to support On2, but greatly changed my mind again after reading what you posted in person. I believe I'm not the only one feeling that way. This was an unfortunate accident after all.
On the other hand, On2 is responsible too, for not obfuscating the Java code (if that is the origin), or (if it's stolen by a hacker) for not keeping your "intellectual property" secure if it's that precious to you.

VP6 can't be an alternative but VP7 can. I hope On2 will be concentrating on VP7 (or maybe VP8?).

We too got a legal letter from lawyers hired by Microsoft when their Windows 2000 code was leaked and we quoted a few lines in our (technical and harmless) news article where one of us tried to judge if it was authentic or fake by testing an unknown feature of TaskMgr which could be read from the src. We complied with their request but felt really strange, because it was their fault not ours that the code was leaked, yet we were treated as if we were criminals. It was like, they let out a big fart, and then got angry saying "You unlawfully listened to it. It's our intellectual property and you have no rights to blah blah"
Um, anyway, maybe that traumatic experience was the reason I overreacted in a weird way here in this thread.

falcon2000eg · 30th April 2006, 18:40

The question really should be what the benefits of distributing libvp62 under lgpl are, is it useful to OSS community .I don't think so .another reason is the moral issue making a codec is not like making word processing program, there is a lot of math and algorithms especially if it is non-mpeg .On2 made there own standards with their original ideas and they deserve some respect for their work (let the law things aside for while) why harm the company just because we can I cannot see the point nor understand why some one do that .
Sorry for my bad English that’s why I do not post a lot here but I follow most of the topics and this topic and the discussion in it is very rich.

temporance · 30th April 2006, 18:55

rjamorim:

An idea for rarewares: how about a setting wiki page devoted to describing the vp6 format. People who have learnt from the libvp62 code could write a full description of the format. I would be willing to help out in a little way.

And why stop with a vp6 format wiki? The OS world at large would benefit from wiki pages describing "closed" formats.

The beauty of this idea is that, as far as I know, it would not be infringing anything as it could be written without copying anything -- it would be an original work, created by multiple authors who themselves own the copyright. A bit like wikipedia.

Open source developers could quite ligitimately use the wiki as a specification to create clean-room implementatinos of formats like vp6.

Manao · 30th April 2006, 22:32

Quote:

On2 made there own standards with their original ideas and they deserve some respect for their work

All codecs use the same principles. The hardest part of making a video codec is to avoid the overpatented mine field that concerns video algorithms.

Quote:

is it useful to OSS community

Ask the linux users.

Quote:

why harm the company

How can that harm the company ? I still don't see why allowing the linux people to watch VP6 videos would harm On2. I don't think somebody in the OSS community would do a VP6 encoder when there are more efficient standards out there. Since the VP6 format is patented, no firm can take the libvp62 code, and sell it without paying licenses fee to On2.

In the end, imho, it can only promote the format, not harm it.

Kopernikus · 1st May 2006, 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by temporance

rjamorim:

An idea for rarewares: how about a setting wiki page devoted to describing the vp6 format. People who have learnt from the libvp62 code could write a full description of the format. I would be willing to help out in a little way.

And why stop with a vp6 format wiki? The OS world at large would benefit from wiki pages describing "closed" formats.

The beauty of this idea is that, as far as I know, it would not be infringing anything as it could be written without copying anything -- it would be an original work, created by multiple authors who themselves own the copyright. A bit like wikipedia.

Open source developers could quite ligitimately use the wiki as a specification to create clean-room implementatinos of formats like vp6.

Have a look here:

http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?title=Main_Page

temporance · 4th May 2006, 11:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kopernikus

Have a look here:

http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?title=Main_Page

Perfect. Take a look at http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?title=On2_VP6

Contributions more than welcome, if only prettification.

frex · 31st August 2006, 02:02

sorry but any working links to the source code available now?

Sirber · 31st August 2006, 02:31

not sure it's legal to repost it, but I'm sure many has them.

merbanan · 4th September 2006, 11:47

http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?title=On2_VP5

Sirber · 4th September 2006, 14:47

why VP5?

bond · 10th September 2006, 13:48

the thread to discuss the new vp6 and vp5 decoder added to ffmpeg is this one

dont post here about the new decoder...

Liisachan · 10th September 2006, 14:13

Ok. bond.

30th April 2006, 03:38	#242 \| Link
rjamorim Blah! Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Brazil Posts: 337	You guys are all nuts, but in a nice sort of way Well, I decided to compromise. Not because On2 ever contacted me in reasonable terms (they didn't, all they did was to brandish the DMCA as some soft of Mighty Sword of Destruction +5), but because I discussed this a lot with Liisachan and we came to conclusions that seem to be the best to all parties. Liisachan is smart and reasonable. On2 are <censored> that lost whatever modicum of respect I had for them due to that old VP3 thing. So, the compromise is: I'll stop hosting the sources but I'll keep hosting the directshow filter and demo decoder. The directshow filter is much more useful than sources for the vast majority of users out there anyway. And I'm considering linking to other binaries using libVP62 (I know of one being worked on as we speak) at RareWares as well. Should be enough for everyone. If it isn't... tough luck. I have more valuable stuff to worry about anyway. Best regards (to the good guys ) Roberto. Edit: these changes will only appear on RW tomorrow (sunday) __________________ Get latest LAME, Vorbis and more binaries at RareWares: http://www.rarewares.org

30th April 2006, 18:55	#245 \| Link
temporance Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 486	rjamorim: An idea for rarewares: how about a setting wiki page devoted to describing the vp6 format. People who have learnt from the libvp62 code could write a full description of the format. I would be willing to help out in a little way. And why stop with a vp6 format wiki? The OS world at large would benefit from wiki pages describing "closed" formats. The beauty of this idea is that, as far as I know, it would not be infringing anything as it could be written without copying anything -- it would be an original work, created by multiple authors who themselves own the copyright. A bit like wikipedia. Open source developers could quite ligitimately use the wiki as a specification to create clean-room implementatinos of formats like vp6. Last edited by temporance; 30th April 2006 at 18:59.

10th September 2006, 13:48	#253 \| Link
bond Registered User Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 9,770	the thread to discuss the new vp6 and vp5 decoder added to ffmpeg is this one dont post here about the new decoder... __________________ Between the weak and the strong one it is the freedom which oppresses and the law that liberates (Jean Jacques Rousseau) I know, that I know nothing (Socrates) MPEG-4 ASP FAQ \| AVC/H.264 FAQ \| AAC FAQ \| MP4 FAQ \| MP4Menu stores DVD Menus in MP4 (guide) Ogg Theora \| Ogg Vorbis use WM9 today and get Micro$oft controlling the A/V market tomorrow for free

30th April 2006, 07:03	#243 \| Link
Liisachan 李姗倩 Lǐ Shān Qiàn Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,340	@On2Tech I refrained from posting anything here to make sure you can have a good weekend, but since I've been named... What I actually did was sending 2 PMs to rjamorim, costing a few minutes and like 10 minutes respectively. Rjamorim is giving me too much credit. Here's 2 things I wanted to say to you: (1) You said "I accept that the JAVA binary is out there and cannot be put back into the bag so to speak" which is true too. But accepting that .jar being around, is practically giving anyone the same (or the similar) thing than libvp62. Any good programmers (not me) can decompile it and re-implement it easily. So, how about considering what Sharktooth, smok3 and others suggested? If this goes on, there will be buggy VP62 decoders out there (you said that code contained a bug which was fixed later). Buggy decoders could unfairly damage the reputation of VP62. This already happened in the relationship between LQ Tremor decoder in ffdshow and Ogg Vorbis. I'm sure many users who use ffdshow's def Vorbis decoder without a 2nd thought assume that Vorbis is not so good. Which is really frustrating, because it's not Vorbis' fault... (2) I'd like to support anyone who might create an alternative for AVC/VC-1. Many said they started disliking On2 because of this mess, but I won't. I once got unmotivated to support On2, but greatly changed my mind again after reading what you posted in person. I believe I'm not the only one feeling that way. This was an unfortunate accident after all. On the other hand, On2 is responsible too, for not obfuscating the Java code (if that is the origin), or (if it's stolen by a hacker) for not keeping your "intellectual property" secure if it's that precious to you. VP6 can't be an alternative but VP7 can. I hope On2 will be concentrating on VP7 (or maybe VP8?). We too got a legal letter from lawyers hired by Microsoft when their Windows 2000 code was leaked and we quoted a few lines in our (technical and harmless) news article where one of us tried to judge if it was authentic or fake by testing an unknown feature of TaskMgr which could be read from the src. We complied with their request but felt really strange, because it was their fault not ours that the code was leaked, yet we were treated as if we were criminals. It was like, they let out a big fart, and then got angry saying "You unlawfully listened to it. It's our intellectual property and you have no rights to blah blah" Um, anyway, maybe that traumatic experience was the reason I overreacted in a weird way here in this thread.

30th April 2006, 18:40	#244 \| Link
falcon2000eg Registered User Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Egypt Posts: 70	The question really should be what the benefits of distributing libvp62 under lgpl are, is it useful to OSS community .I don't think so .another reason is the moral issue making a codec is not like making word processing program, there is a lot of math and algorithms especially if it is non-mpeg .On2 made there own standards with their original ideas and they deserve some respect for their work (let the law things aside for while) why harm the company just because we can I cannot see the point nor understand why some one do that . Sorry for my bad English that’s why I do not post a lot here but I follow most of the topics and this topic and the discussion in it is very rich.

31st August 2006, 02:02	#249 \| Link
frex Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1	sorry but any working links to the source code available now?

31st August 2006, 02:31	#250 \| Link
Sirber retired developer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 8,978	not sure it's legal to repost it, but I'm sure many has them.

4th September 2006, 11:47	#251 \| Link
merbanan Registered User Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 11	http://wiki.multimedia.cx/index.php?title=On2_VP5

4th September 2006, 14:47	#252 \| Link
Sirber retired developer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 8,978	why VP5?

10th September 2006, 14:13	#254 \| Link
Liisachan 李姗倩 Lǐ Shān Qiàn Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 1,340	Ok. bond.