Hi Matt, Just out of interest what would it cost to develop our own farm system. ?
Sent from my iPad > On 7 Mar 2016, at 2:12 PM, Matthew Scutter <[email protected]> wrote: > > FLARM's idea of licensing is for you to produce identical hardware to run > their proprietary software on.[1] There is no standard, open or closed, to > license and implement. This really doesn't have any bearing to the ISO > standards writing process, except in how dissimilar it is. > > As for the encryption, here's the IGC's views on the matter[2] > "it is our opinion that the justifications for encryption cited by FLARM are > weak, and that the actual motivations for encrypting the messages fall > largely outside the technical realm." > > I think FLARM has done great things for gliding. I am proud to own a > PowerFLARM, but they've overstepped the mark with encryption. > > [1]http://flarm.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/FLARM-System-Design-and-Compatibility.pdf > [2]http://www.fai.org/downloads/igc/IGC_2016_Plenary_AX6_2_4 > >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Justin Couch <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 7/03/2016 1:42 PM, Mark Newton wrote: >>> Protecting the text of a standard under copyright and making it >>> purchasable, is not the same thing as making the standard unimplementable >>> without paying license fees, and you know it. >>> >>> Reputable standards bodies insist on open royalty free patent licensing >>> these days. The ones that don’t are slowly marginalizing themselves. >> >> Incorrect. I've been involved in the ISO standards writing process for just >> over 20 years now - including part of the MPEG 4 and 7 standards, so I know >> it inside out. Reputable standards bodies like ISO have individual IP policy >> for every specification or group. It is not blanket across the organisation. >> In the case of MPEG, there is a large patent body pool called MPEG-LA. You >> cannot implement an open standard without paying license fees for the >> patents behind. MPEG is very far from being an isolated incident at ISO. >> There are other completely open standards such as SEDRIS or X3D that require >> contributors to license any contributed patents for zero cost to all >> implementors. There's, of course, others in between. >> >> >>> I can write an MPEG implementation which interoperates with everyone else’s >>> MPEG streams and distribute it in competition with other MPEG >>> implementations, by following the text of the standard. >> >> No you can't. You can try, but they will come after you, particularly if you >> write an encoder. That's why alternates like Ogg guys started out - to >> completely avoid the patents. >> >> >> -- >> Justin Couch http://www.vlc.com.au/ >> Java 3D Graphics Information http://www.j3d.org/ >> LinkedIn http://au.linkedin.com/in/justincouch/ >> G+ WetMorgoth >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> "Look through the lens, and the light breaks down into many lights. >> Turn it or move it, and a new set of arrangements appears... is it >> a single light or many lights, lights that one must know how to >> distinguish, recognise and appreciate? Is it one light with many >> frames or one frame for many lights?" -Subcomandante Marcos >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> _______________________________________________ >> Aus-soaring mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring > > _______________________________________________ > Aus-soaring mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
_______________________________________________ Aus-soaring mailing list [email protected] http://lists.base64.com.au/listinfo/aus-soaring
