XViD Development stopped

[Boardlord]

I have just posted this issue on AVS Forum! / http://www.avsforum.com , http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=164359 I hope we XviD users will get a positive response from those guys too!

[-h]

They, and everyone else for that matter, are not allowed to distribute XviD under the GPL PERIOD either in source or binary form ... wether they license the patents or not would be inconsequential. The GPL is a particularely poor license for patent encumbered code, especially if there is no single copyright owner who can amend the license with country restrictions.

Here's a note from RMS about just this point (it was concerning LAME and MP3 patents, iirc) - http://www.xiph.org/archives/vorbis/200110/0278.html

So yes, no one in a country which respects the patents held on MPEG-4 technologies can distribute XviD, in binary or source form. Kind of makes my current location of the USA a bit uncomfortable..

Sigma might be more inclined to contribute their source if they were given a license to XviD they could do something with legally (which is to say an alternate license, the GPL is useless even with clause 8 since they want to distribute it in the US where the MPEG-4 patents are almost certainly valid). Not to say I find that at all likely ...

If someone sought to license code from XviD, whatever they receive would no longer be GPL'ed. Well that's up to whomever requests the license - I don't see why they'd request what they're given to be GPL'ed though. Can't say I see Sigma as a potential licensee either of course.. :)

-h

[midiguy]

I am not going to let up until those sigma pricks give credit to all the XviD developers and to anyone who contributed to XviD. I don't think anyone else should either.

[MfA]

Originally posted by -h So yes, no one in a country which respects the patents held on MPEG-4 technologies can distribute XviD, in binary or source form. Kind of makes my current location of the USA a bit uncomfortable..Its worse than that ... while Stallman says that we cannot consider the software free in countries where the patents exist that is not to say the software is necessarily free in countries where they dont. To make it so the copyright owners have to use their right under clause 8 to exclude countries where the patents exist.

Without exclusions anyone who distributes under the GPL obligates himself to extend all the GPL freedoms to any recipient ... and that includes recipients in the USA. As we have established we cannot guarantuee this, and so we cannot distribute XviD under the GPL.

The only people who are allowed to distribute XviD under the GPL are ignorant people ;)

[Darrius "Junto" Thompson]

The next question to ask is, "Where did they get the code for
their video decoder chip?" How does the GPL license apply if code is embedded into a processor and then sold to device manufacturers?

http://www.sigmadesigns.com/products/em8470series.htm

Darrius

[TheXung]

You're right, that Sigma reply sounds too belittling. They are claiming it is their code and making it sound like the release of the source is an act of generousity on their part. While the action may right a wrong and is all that is legally required of them, I am getting the impression that it may be too little too late. This was a project that was bourn from the fire of what had happened with project mayo. Another incident where corporate interests squish all that is attractive about GPL. What is needed here is a public apology of some sort. I am hoping the core developers aren't thinking, "burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me."

The fate of this project lies in how Micheal, Christopher, and Peter feel about Sigma's reply. (While there are others who helped out, I don't think too many can replace the roles that they have played in development) This is a project that has seen TWO fires in its history! The fate of future complex/well executed GPL projects lies in how this legally and publically pans out. I am definitely gonna miss XviD.

[Emp3r0r]

do you think they could have used xvid decoder ip to create their hardware chips? this really is all out crazy. i mean i expected something like this but i always thought it would be divx networks continuing their evil ways ( ;) heh ). anyway, the following statement makes me feel outraged"We are pleased to provide the development community with an open source MPEG-4 CODEC..." the nerve, as if they did all the providing

lets hope everyone at least learns a valuable lesson from it all

[tanksimpson]

Sigma has just announced that they are releasing the source code for the RMP4 MPEG-4 codec tomorrow. Check out the press release at http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/020822/220286_1.html

As I predicted on this forum *weeks* ago, posting on Slashdot would produce exactly this result, just as it did when Vidomi ripped off VirtualDub. Had this issue been addressed in an open forum, instead of behind closed doors, much time could have been saved and much bickering could have been avoided. Although I support the efforts of the XviD team, I still think it was a mistake for moderators on *this* forum to squash discussion of this and related topics because of their own agenda. The value of a forum like doom9's lies chiefly in its capacity for users to exchange information freely. How many of you experts first came to the doom9 community as newbies? I would suggest that much of your knowledge and expertise has been gained by being able to learn from other people's questions and answers. I know that doom9's forum has been a great help to me - that is why it makes me sad to see that a few moderators have been allowed/encouraged to introduce their own bias into the moderating process, no matter how well-intentioned it may have been. Given the outcome that we have witnessed today regarding XviD vs. Sigma, was it really worthwhile to subvert the forum process and inhibit free discussion?

[balbrain]

I have a lot of friends in the Silicon Valeey area and thru a couple degrees of separation one of them was able to get some inside dope on Sigma from one of the developers [Yeah! Right =P] who works there.

Gues what, in a few days sigma was also planning to release an MPEG4 Encoding utility - which was gonna be a new GUI on VirtualDub. He said they have shelved those plans for now since this issue is heating up.

How LOW can one get

--balbrain:angry:

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by ookzDVD
PS. Ookz is preparing mailbomber... ready to launch! ;)

WHATEVER YOU DO DON'T DO THAT! If their inbox gets flooded how will they read all the actual emails we are flooding them with. If they get an inbox full of spam likely they will delete first and ask questions later. Lets keep some tact here and keep this to a civil uprising/revolution. If we act the part of a child they will ignore us. Lets make sure they know we are adults. ;)

One well written email will suffice ookzDVD. ;)

[MfA]

I assume iDCT and MC would be done by dedicated hardware, and on the bitstream side they support RVLC so that also has to be substantially different ... if they used any XviD code it wouldnt be much, and since it would be in their firmware and for some unknown embedded RISC core it would also be almost impossible to proof anyway.

[int 21h]

In some way shape form or another, it would have to be rewritten for that platform anyways.

[Wimpy]

Since the Sigma announcement stating their intent to make the RMP4 source available, the following questions come to mind...

1. Will the XviD project re-start once the source is available or will it remain suspended until the appropriate credit(s) is made by Sigma?

2. Is their much (if anything) added or improved in the RMP4 codec which will help the XviD codec develop? The two-pass stuff is gone, their claimed B-frame support is dubious.

Maybe some of the XviD team would care to comment?

In any case, there is a growing trend with regards to GPL violation. VirtualDub, CDex and now XviD are all recent victims :-( I hope this sorry mess is sorted soon as XviD is a excellent project and I would hate to see it lost.

[R3g]

whaoo ! That's what I call a rude awakening. Just arrived at work, and what do I discover when going to wach my daily news on doom9's ??
I think I've got nothing more to say, else that I am with you all, and give all my support to XviD developpers and contributors. I am going towrite an email to SD, to tell them about my surprise their press release doesn't have a word about the real creators of the codec, but unfortunately I don't think I can do anything much.

Keep up the fight, xviD developpemnt can't stop like that, SD has to make public apologies.

[Wimpy]

RMP4 source is out. Get it directly from here...

ftp://ftp.sigmadesigns.com/bbs/misc/RMP4V1_1.zip

...or fill out an SLA form (cheeky buggers) to grab it here...

http://www.sigmadesigns.com/products/RMP4_SLA.htm

[Doom9]

has anyone taken a look at the source? I found a GPL notice in the first file I opened. But no credit to XviD whatsoever, in fact Sigma added their own copyright notices. What's even more interesting is that their SLA collides with the license of the source.. the source says GPL.. neither SLA nor the press release says anything similar.

in older news the following may be interesting: http://www1.internetwire.com/iwire/release_html_b1?release_id=45761 and http://forums.divx.com/viewtopic.php?topic=40040&forum=5. Seems even DXn is supporting XviD (or just taking the chance to turn some of the heat - the adware issue - away).

[Swede]

Comparing RM4-source with Xivd: (from the file quant_h263.c, yes the same filename)

Xvid:
/* quantize intra-block
*/


void
quant_intra_c(int16_t * coeff,
const int16_t * data,
const uint32_t quant,
const uint32_t dcscalar)

RM4:
/************************************************************************
Purpose: quantize intra-block by H263 method
Author: David Zheng
Sigma Designs, Inc
Date: Jul.26, 2002
*************************************************************************/

void quant_h263_intra_c(int16_t * const coeff,
const int16_t * data,
const uint32_t quant,
const int32_t dcscalar)


Author?????

[Swede]

There are a few of these lines here and there:

"This code inspired by the XVID MPEG-4 VIDEO CODEC"

[R3g]

Yes, author, this guy wrote "_h263_". He did a good work.

[nikthebak]

He has to earn his $5000/month salary somehow, doesn't he?

Now this is beyond license issues. This is severe and rude copyright infringement.

[mat]

also you can look in vfw in codec.c (for xvid) and mp4v_codec.c
and you can see they just remane the proc and change a little (just a littke the code).

For example

/* decompressor */

LRESULT QueryDecompressor(CODEC * codec, BITMAPINFO *lpbiInput, BITMAPINFO *lpbiOutput)
{
int colorspace;
BITMAPINFOHEADER * inhdr = (BITMAPINFOHEADER*)&lpbiInput->bmiHeader;
BITMAPINFOHEADER * outhdr = (BITMAPINFOHEADER*)&lpbiOutput->bmiHeader;

if (lpbiInput == NULL)
{
return ICERR_ERROR;
}

if (inhdr->biCompression != FOURCC_DIVX
&& inhdr->biCompression != FOURCC_DX50
&& inhdr->biCompression != FOURCC_RMP4)
{
return ICERR_BADFORMAT;
}

if (lpbiOutput == NULL)
return ICERR_OK;

if (inhdr->biWidth != outhdr->biWidth ||
inhdr->biHeight != outhdr->biHeight ||
(colorspace = D_translate_colorspace(outhdr)) == MP4V_CSP_NULL)
{
return ICERR_BADFORMAT;
}

codec->colorspace = colorspace;

return ICERR_OK;
} for sigma and for xvid
/* decompressor */

LRESULT decompress_query(CODEC * codec, BITMAPINFO *lpbiInput, BITMAPINFO *lpbiOutput)
{
BITMAPINFOHEADER * inhdr = &lpbiInput->bmiHeader;
BITMAPINFOHEADER * outhdr = &lpbiOutput->bmiHeader;

if (lpbiInput == NULL)
{
return ICERR_ERROR;
}

if (inhdr->biCompression != FOURCC_XVID && inhdr->biCompression != FOURCC_DIVX)
{
return ICERR_BADFORMAT;
}

if (lpbiOutput == NULL)
{
return ICERR_OK;
}

if (inhdr->biWidth != outhdr->biWidth ||
inhdr->biHeight != outhdr->biHeight ||
get_colorspace(outhdr) == XVID_CSP_NULL)
{
return ICERR_BADFORMAT;
}

return ICERR_OK;
}

[Doom9]

@mat: damn, even I would've motified more if I were copying. I guess every student programmer once faced a situation where time was running out and he had a working copy of a colleague and had to modify it for his/her own needs, and you'd certainly not get away with changing just a few variables..

I still think it was a mistake for moderators on *this* forum to squash discussion of this and related topics because of their own agenda. The value of a forum like doom9's lies chiefly in its capacity for users to exchange information freely. How many of you experts first came to the doom9 community as newbies? I would suggest that much of your knowledge and expertise has been gained by being able to learn from other people's questions and answers. I know that doom9's forum has been a great help to me - that is why it makes me sad to see that a few moderators have been allowed/encouraged to introduce their own bias into the moderating process, no matter how well-intentioned it may have been. Given the outcome that we have witnessed today regarding XviD vs. Sigma, was it really worthwhile to subvert the forum process and inhibit free discussion?

It was the decision of the XviD developers to keep a low profile on this issue and it has nothing to do with moderators having their own agenda. All our actions (locking threads) result out of the wish of the lead developers to not create a big fuss about it before Sigma has been given the chance to react. Imagine the other way, if Sigma decided to financially support XviD, or pay the MPEG LA licensing fees allowing fully licensed XviD distributions of XviD. Going public would most certainly have ruined any chance of that happening. If I didn't knew the developers wishes I would not have authorized the closing of all threads on the issue, but since I was sworn to secrecy I couldn't even tell the public why this decision was made. I certainly didn't felt comfortable about all this and I'm glad we don't have to hold anything back now.

[JohnV]

The situation is very interesting. Since Envivio licences the Sigma MPEG-4 codec which is infringing the GPL licence (at least until Sigma gives proper credit to XviD), Envivio is in this mess too.
And since it's unlikely that Envivio would agree to make their software GPLed, it's quite likely that Sigma really can't do it either..

Sigma and Envivio should be showing their MPEG-4 solutions at IBC2002 which is held 13-17 September in Amsterdam.

Also, the information I have is that at IBC there will be presented somekind of "mpeg-4 floor"-solution with showcase of the mpeg-4 technology by many companies, including Sigma.

I wonder if Sigma's use of XviD code without proper permission is going to complicate things. This could mean even bigger mess than previously thought.

[temporance]

Originally posted by JohnV
The situation is very interesting. Since Envivio licences the Sigma MPEG-4 codec which is infringing the GPL licence (at least until Sigma gives proper credit to XviD), Envivio is in this mess too.
And since it's unlikely that Envivio would agree to make their software GPLed, it's quite likely that Sigma really can't do it either..

Don't forget about patents - under GPL you can either license patents for all users of the GPL'd code, or for no-one at all.

MPEGLA would never agree to an unlimited patent license for xvid-derived code (everyone would use xvid and no-one would pay MPEGLA). So anyone using xvid, or derived code, for anything other than personal experimentation or academic studies, is forced to violate a multitude of patents. Patents apply worldwide too, thanks to the World Trade agreements.


Originally posted by JohnV
Sigma and Envivio should be showing their MPEG-4 solutions at IBC2002 which is held 13-17 September in Amsterdam.

Also, the information I have is that at IBC there will be presented somekind of "mpeg-4 floor"-solution with showcase of the mpeg-4 technology by many companies, including Sigma.


Anyone live near the RAI in Amsterdam want to sneak in with a wad of "Xivd inside" stickers for the Sigma exhibit?

[MfA]

Originally posted by temporance
Don't forget about patents - under GPL you can either license patents for all users of the GPL'd code

True.

or for no-one at all.

Nope, says no such thing ... if the program is patent encumbered and there is no royaltee free no strings attached patent license for use under the GPL for everyone (with a possible geographic restriction) then the GPL grants you no rights at all. It doesnt matter if the patents are selectively licensed to a couple of people, or to "no-one at all" ... the GPL doesnt care, no rights for everyone.

Of course Sigma claims copyright to most of the source code (which it blatantly plagiarized, but I dont know if that necessarily qualifies as copyright infringement). A copyright owner is not bound by the license he places on a program ... which is one of the problems of GPL.

It wouldnt be the first time a copyright owner supposedly releases patent encumbered code under the GPL without the appropriate patent license ... they are perfectly free to do so, they dont need a license to distribute. Its just that the people who receive it can do very little with it because the GPL grants them no rights (FSF should really make the GPL a certified trademark to prevent these kind of shananigans). Lizardtech does this for instance.

[Doom9]

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/vza-23.08.02-000/
For those who don't speak German.. there will be an article that explains the relationship between the various codecs in the next issue (whatever that means). German readers may already have that issue by today so they might be able to tell us more.

[X-Ray]

I didn't get the latest c't yet, but I'll tell what they write as soon as I get it.
They had a quite interesting codec comparsion (with OpenDivX and 3ivX...) a long time ago and promised OpenDivX a great future...

dev0

[fileman]

The c't is distributed every second saturday - so I'm looking forward to tomorrow's issue...

Regards, fileman.

[robUx4]

Is there any plan on legal actions against Sigma violation of the copyright ?

At least you could force Sigma to just say that it's the XVID source and nothing else. Also I guess that Sigma will have a hard time recovering from this bad press...

[Shayne]

Originally posted by trbarry
These things are usually settled in the court of public opinion, not of law.

- Tom

I do believe this to be true it is us the public that buy their wages.

Does anyone have any other addresses to sdesigns?

kal@sdesigns.com

Could you please tell me if your new Mpeg4 Codec Is pirated from the free version of XviD?

If i do not get a satisfactory response to this issue i will be slamming sdesigns whenever i get the chance.

I feel this will not increase sales for your company and i know as for me i will not buy anything from a corporation that can not carry themselves in an ethical manner.

[JohnV]

Does anybody know a person who has a Sigma Designs XCard.
The reason is that Menno (FAAD/FAAD2 developer) would like to check the software which comes with it. Menno is looking for it:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=30565#post30565

menno wrote:
http://www.sigmadesigns.com/pdf_docs/em847Xpb.pdf
That's the chip that supposedly does the decoding on Xcard. Then somewhere in that document I found this line:
"Low Complexity AAC (decoded using software on x86 host CPU)"

Does anyone have the software that comes with this card? I would like to have a look at it.

Menno

Sigma was asking previously if they could use FAAD2 "for free". Now after this XviD episode, it's not hard to guess what may have happened also in this case...

[mwillberg]

Anyone live near the RAI in Amsterdam want to sneak in with a wad of "Xivd inside" stickers for the Sigma exhibit?

I will actually be present as an exhibitor and I really hope I find the time to go look for these guys... Would really like to see the looks on their faces when their explaining this.

[KAMiKAZOW]

Originally posted by JohnV
The situation is very interesting. Since Envivio licences the Sigma MPEG-4 codec which is infringing the GPL licence (at least until Sigma gives proper credit to XviD), Envivio is in this mess too.
At least the MP4 decoder is based on a numbre of open source components.
Quote from their credits.txt:
"This software is based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG
Group.

This software is based in part of the work of the FreeType Team.

This product includes software developed by the Apache Group for use in
the Apache HTTP server project (http://www.apache.org/).

This software is based in part on some code of the Darwin Streaming Server
(for which the source code is available under the
terms of the Apple Public Source License Version 1.2 at
http://www.opensource.apple.com/projects/streaming/).

This software is based in part on some code of the RSA Data Security, Inc.
(includes software derived from the RSA Data
Security, Inc. MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm)."

If they used this codec also in commercial applications, they can license eg. the DivX codec.

[droolian01]

DAMNNNN!
Just started getting my captures looking good too!!!

I am really gutted, I'd hoped that the developers quiet dip;omacy would have borne fruit.

I am just a poor amateur. I can't program, i don't work with computers, but just using xvid with its numerous updates made captruring tv a fantastc thing to do. The thought that i may discover a bug or give a useful suggestion was something very special.

Ofcourse there is divx5 but xvid is better NOW. Anyway, xvid was more about feeling part of a research community, something an amateur like me finds precious.

I have very little idea about patent rights of GPL whatever, and have no idea what i can do to help other than boycot/badmouth SD at every opportunity. I would contribute financially if funds were needed for lawers, i think there are many people here who would too.

For Gods sake don't give up yet!

[MaTTeR]

Originally posted by droolian01
I would contribute financially if funds were needed for lawers, i think there are many people here who would too.


Indeed if it were to ever make it to a court case I would surely chip in some moolah also. Let's hope it doesn't make it that far and Sigma finally wakes up and does a reality check. It's amazing an American company would pull this kind of stunt, I could understand if a European company did this due to them not being bound by certain US laws. Then again...I think we've all seen what companies are capable of doing in the past few months when they really get greedy.

Would it be worth while to also contact Sigma's vendors to make them aware of this situation? Perhap's a few of them wouldn't be so eager to carry SD products if they knew of this unscrupulous behavior taking place. Just a thought.

[Ivion]

Originally posted by temporance
Anyone live near the RAI in Amsterdam want to sneak in with a wad of "Xivd inside" stickers for the Sigma exhibit?

[foolin' around]
Hey, I live in Amsterdam, if anyone would be so kind to make some nice stickers I could always try. :p ;)
[/foolin' around]
But I've send a e-mail to a major Dutch computer magazine's (Computer!Totaal, wich would be freely translated: Totally Computer! or Total Computer!) press apartment, hope they will include the news on their frontpage and in their next issue, I gave them links to Doom9.org, this forum (and this thread), XviD.org, SigmaDesigns.com, DivX.com, the thread on DivX.com started by Neo Neko, and some news articles. Thank goodness the biggest Dutch Science/Technology site (http://www.tweakers.net) already had the news on their frontpage.

Let us all pray in these hard times that XviD shall survive and be victorious. All the luck to all those wonderfull XviD team-members...hope ya all make it through.

Many Wishes from a Dutch XviD-lover.
-David

[temporance]

Now that Sigma has release the source code to their codec, they have opened a huge chink in their armour. Anyone who owns a patent in video encoding/decoding can now look at codec source code to see whether Sigma is infringing. Source code is pretty compelling evidence for a patent lawsuit.

There are literally 100's of patents that could be violated by this code. More than the patents that are "essential" for MPEG-4 and licensed by MPEGLA.

So, if we have volunteers with the knowledge, we could trawl patent databases to find patents that are infringed by this code. Then we contact the patent holder to inform them of Sigma's infringment.

Good luck xvid!

[EDIT: I forgot that Sigma's d/l license tries to put all the responsibiilty for patents onto the end user. However, for corporate licensees of the codec (if any) this line of attack would have serious consequences]

[MfA]

Get them sued for contributory infringement ... then after that they can go after Koepi for distributing XviD binaries (because if they are infringing XviD almost certainly is as well). With all those successes behind their belt they might feel brave enough to test the waters to see to what extent the courts are willing to extend contributory infringement to source code distribution.

Someone without preconceptions (like an a-technical judge) has a good chance of not going for this "somewhere between machine code and higher level representations this transforms from a contributory infringement into a free speech issue" schtick. The only reason noone has pushed this angle in court is because of public opinion, but I wouldnt count on that to stop them forever.

Dont rock the boat.

[GreatLord]

I do have compete driffemt e-mail adr to Sigma,
I have promies not give it out. I have sendt e-mail to SD, I amwating on answers. it normal take a week before I get any answers.

I have been in Sigmas News group in many year before I start to rip DVD.


Some idot did say GPL must be remove it is bad for all. b.l.a
here a complete copy of his msg in Sigma Designs news group.



From geno_cyber@tin.it
"http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5089


If what it's written on that article is true then it's simply silly
and quite dumb, isn't it ?
Now a communistic minded open-source group accuses a famous
multinational group that designs high-end hardware video codecs to
have illegally used their free open source project source code without
respecting their pathetic GPL "rules" thing .. ??!
Is the world dominated by these stupid punks or is any other interests
hidden behind that opensource movement, uh ?

I don't know about you but I don't like open source communistic minded
mentality at all. It's thanks to opensource things like Linux that
Microsoft estabilished its full market monopoly, simply because the
illegally born Linux opensource thing just killed any possibility to
get any real commercial Unix OS and just a serie of poor coded Linux
versions that are used to avoid paying big bucks for professional
Unixes (like AIX) to set servers up. People should remember that Linux
started as a commercial Unix hack and reverse-engineering thing. So
all the opensource "rules" like GPL/GNU that is set are simply
pathetic.

I seriously think that opensource movements should be stopped. The
more they continue acting like this and more troubles they will give
to the market, customers and society.

Open source is bad because it allows some no-global guys to attack
democracy and the free market, as this case against SigmaDesigns
demonstrates.

I hope the judge won't be a communistic minded, socialistic one and
that open source movements get stopped ASAP."

[temporance]

Originally posted by MfA
Get them sued for contributory infringement ... then after that they can go after Koepi for distributing XviD binaries (because if they are infringing XviD almost certainly is as well). With all those successes behind their belt they might feel brave enough to test the waters to see to what extent the courts are willing to extend contributory infringement to source code distribution.

No chance. Unless Koepi is a millionaire, he is not worth chasing. Make an example of him? No - too much bad press. It should be obvious that xvid helps patent holders promote their wares - it is not making, or diverting $$$ away from the licensors. I'm not sure this is true of Sigma.

Will this be the new wave of corporate scandal and lawbreaking to hit America?

[temporance]

Originally posted by GreatLord
I seriously think that opensource movements should be stopped. The
more they continue acting like this and more troubles they will give
to the market, customers and society.
Ignore this attitude - he probably thinks that academic papers and research findings are bad for society and should also be kept under lock and key!

[GreatLord]

I like open src project. But some did not at Sigma Designs NewsGroup.
news://sigmadesigns.com.

I only whant to info all about what happen at Sigma Designs Newsgroups

[Wimpy]

I am ignoring, but what does 'troll' mean exactly? Never did understand it?

[Marc FD]

Originally posted by GreatLord
I do have compete driffemt e-mail adr to Sigma,
I have promies not give it out. I have sendt e-mail to SD, I amwating on answers. it normal take a week before I get any answers.

I have been in Sigmas News group in many year before I start to rip DVD.


Some idot did say GPL must be remove it is bad for all. b.l.a
here a complete copy of his msg in Sigma Designs news group.



From geno_cyber@tin.it

_CENSORED_



My GOD !! we got a seriously-brain-damaged here !!
Is it _possible_ to be so dumb?
or maybe he's lobotomized?
or it's a cyborg?

i'm voiceless....

[ACClarke]

Originally posted by Marc FD


My GOD !! we got a seriously-brain-damaged here !!
Is it _possible_ to be so dumb?
or maybe he's lobotomized?
or it's a cyborg?

i'm voiceless....

OR MAYBE ........... LE PEN :devil:

[MfA]

Originally posted by temporance
It should be obvious that xvid helps patent holders promote their wares - it is not making, or diverting $$$ away from the licensors.

This is only true for members of the patent pool, who have pretty much resigned themselves (finally) to getting no profits from use by consumers ... there is no guarantuee those other patent holders you suggest we look for will be so enlightened.

[avih]

guys, pls don't respond to trolls.
thx.

[Doom9]

you might want to have a look at
./codec/decoder/mbdecoding.c
./codec/encoder/putvlc.c
./codec/encoder/putvlc.h
and then have a look at the latest OpenDivX release..

[CruNcher]

Hi @ all what i don't understand is why should Envivo license 2 Mpeg4 Engines ??. They licensed DICAS Mpegable and SigmaDesigns that makes no sense to me did XviD Developers checked DICAS Core yet ? I don't want to say that DICAS Core is useing XviD Sources too but its a posibility isn't it ?

Sure they use all the same Codebase and this is the MuMusys Code which Projectmayo is based on but those individual tweakings make a Codec superior against another. And i doubt that we will see any [major] improvements for now only those tweaks and that is what makes this here so important XviD Developers should get Credits for this Tweaks :). But who says that DivX Network isn't useing XviD tweaks they also learn from the Source they don't use the same Code but they also get an Advantage out of this and they don't release their Sources or give out Credits so that Xvid Devs could learn from them B-Frames as an example.

Offtopic: I think we don't hear anything from DivX Networks for the moment becaouse they preparing the integration of H.26L by now and we will see them implementing this great new technology first into the DivX Codec as it was with B-Frames before :)

[MaTTeR]

Originally posted by CruNcher
Offtopic: I think we don't hear anything from DivX Networks for the moment becaouse they preparing the integration of H.26L by now and we will see them implementing this great new technology first into the DivX Codec as it was with B-Frames before :)

Being the first one out the door in implementing something isn't always a good thing, surely you have seen examples in real world applications. In fact, some might tell you they are flawed. Have you ever seen any advantage using Qpel or GMC with Divx5.x? Ever noticed the frames jumping around after you have used GMC? So in fact I could care less who brings dinner to the table first, I'll always eat whatever is going to taste/look better even if I have a short wait. If and when B-Frames are completed in XviD then I feel quite confident the implementation will be more effecient than that of Divx 5.x:D Uhg...just couldnt resist replying to this off topic post.