Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
27th August 2002, 09:17 | #141 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,075
|
Well it seems they are restoring most of the real history on the files so its moot.
With the latest MPEGLA licenses distributing binaries doesnt seem to be much of a problem anymore, although anyone wishing to distribute them will probably have to sign the MPEGLA patent license (or rather anyone wishing to distribute 50000 pieces of the binary, but since any legal entity can distribute 50K that just means you have to change the owner of the download page to someone with a new license of his own every so often :). After that it becomes impossible to claim no knowledge of the fact that the XviD code is patent encumbered though, and as such not distributable under the GPL (the only legal way of distributing XviD at all, source or binary, at the moment is to claim ignorance of the patents). BTW Temporance, could you point out to me the clause in the GPL which allows me to distribute source code (which is copyrighted in and of itself, so I need a license to distribute) under the GPL if the code is patent encumbered? :) Last edited by MfA; 27th August 2002 at 09:25. |
27th August 2002, 09:24 | #142 | Link | |
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,454
|
Quote:
Maybe the binaries aren't necessarily - that's why I state they still are only for educational purposes and for you having the possibility to help the development by finding some errors. Regards, Koepi
__________________
Koepi's new media development site |
|
27th August 2002, 09:27 | #143 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,075
|
Koepi, only patent wise. You have no formal license as far as copyrights are concerned to distribute XviD, either in source or binary form (unless you claim ignorance of MPEG-4 patents, in which case it doesnt matter if you distribute binaries or source). We all rely on tacit agreements, not the GPL, for that. Which works, but is rather silly.
|
27th August 2002, 11:18 | #144 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Espaņa
Posts: 21
|
Quote:
So even if they fix file headers removing copyrights and replacing original histories they will still be infringing GPL. Then, is there any solution to this issue other that Sigma stopping the distribution of their codec? |
|
27th August 2002, 11:31 | #145 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,075
|
They would be breaking the GPL, but no moreso than Michael/Koepi/umaniac/etc themselves are doing (if Sigma restores all the original copyrights on all the files that is). So that is not really a problem, breaking the letter of the GPL never was the problem ... nearly noone uses it to the letter (XviD ignores what it actually says to the point of silliness though).
BTW A free license for the patent would not be enough to comply with the GPL, it has to be unrestricted too. The MPEGLA licenses only apply to use in compliant products, which even if the licenses were entirely royaltee free (or if the royaltees were payed by Sigma) would be incompatible with the GPL. |
27th August 2002, 13:41 | #146 | Link |
Still Laughing
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Around
Posts: 1,312
|
Sigma avoids MPEGLA royalties by their EULA in their software. Its obvious they intend to do the same with Mpeg-4 via RealMagic, as soon as they solve these GPL annoyances.
However, this entire situation has been a significant road block for Sigma, and I would not be surprised if they rewrote the entire codec (or major portions) so that they could successfully un-GPL it. Remember, it took the XviD team about a year to get rid of all the OpenDivX Licensed code. Sigma has paid programmers working 40 hours a week to do the same... How long will it take them? |
27th August 2002, 13:58 | #147 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,075
|
They should have just done it like the rest of the industry and built from momusys, there even is an official optimized version cut down to simple profile available nowadays. Unlike XviD they dont have to worry about GPL compatibility, so they can reuse it as is.
|
27th August 2002, 16:01 | #148 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 486
|
Quote:
GPL says, in general terms: "you can use/distribute this code as much as you like subject to conditions x, y, z" Non of x, y, z says you must respect patent law. I doesn't say (or need to say): "you can use/distribute this code as much as you like subject to conditions x, y, z, and I will indemnify you against any patent law suit that might arise from the use of this code" Even "hello_world.c" might infringe patents. You can't expect its author to do a patent search before releasing under GPL. GPL and patent laws are just two of many sets of rules that a person must obey in his daily life. GPL is of course optional - you agree to its terms when you use some code like xvid. If those two sets of rules are incompatible, you must choose to violate either one or both sets of rules, or agree not to use xvid under GPL. |
|
27th August 2002, 18:31 | #149 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,926
|
int 21h
Quote:
|
|
27th August 2002, 21:53 | #150 | Link | |
Still Laughing
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Around
Posts: 1,312
|
Quote:
Besides, at the time, nando had no wife.. or significant life to speak of, both of which have changed now |
|
28th August 2002, 02:02 | #151 | Link | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,075
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
28th August 2002, 09:51 | #152 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 486
|
Quote:
1. don't use the code at all 2. violate GPL by buying a patent license for my product 3. violate the patent by releasing my product under GPL 4. do both 2 and 3 and that the only way to be completely legal is option 1. |
|
28th August 2002, 13:21 | #153 | Link |
Dai Suki
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: 2543 miles S.E. of Osaka
Posts: 381
|
Xvid Development stopped?
Is this true?
Darn, i didn't download the latest build I have exams, and don'thave time to read all the posts, but Patents expire in 17 years don't they? Maybe this piece of info could be of help. I enjoyed the ride while it lasted, ja.
__________________
Always choose the path that leaves you with the most degrees of freedom. |
29th August 2002, 11:04 | #156 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sweden
Posts: 27
|
Sigma have change some info, with more.
http://www.sigmadesigns.com/products...ideo_codec.htm and SIgma have done some change at the copyright. plz check it out xvid team. Last edited by GreatLord; 29th August 2002 at 11:08. |
29th August 2002, 11:11 | #157 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 353
|
For example I find this in encoder.c:
Code:
/************************************************************************** * * History: * 01.06.2002 Sigma Designs Inc. * * imported from encoder.c from XVID MPEG-4 VIDEO CODEC * *************************************************************************/ Quote:
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|