Russell Jones wrote:
David Brodbeck wrote:
Russell Jones wrote:
That is incorrect: http://www.vorbis.com/faq/#_fpsupport
Their link to the integer-only implementation is broken. But I believe
them that it exists. ;)
Looks like one of Xiph's servers is down. SVN doesn't work and neit
David Brodbeck wrote:
Russell Jones wrote:
You misunderstand. If Vorbis v1.3 (say) infringes a (submarine or
otherwise) patent, the next version, e.g. v2.0, will be changed such
that it does not. You just won't be able to play v1.3 files on a v2.0
player.
That seems like a serious disin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-03-07 at 11:45 -0800, David Brodbeck wrote:
> Russell Jones wrote:
> > You misunderstand. If Vorbis v1.3 (say) infringes a (submarine or
> > otherwise) patent, the next version, e.g. v2.0, will be changed such
> > that it does not.
Russell Jones wrote:
> You misunderstand. If Vorbis v1.3 (say) infringes a (submarine or
> otherwise) patent, the next version, e.g. v2.0, will be changed such
> that it does not. You just won't be able to play v1.3 files on a v2.0
> player.
That seems like a serious disincentive to designing hard
David Brodbeck wrote:
Russell Jones wrote:
That is incorrect: http://www.vorbis.com/faq/#_fpsupport
Their link to the integer-only implementation is broken. But I believe
them that it exists. ;)
Looks like one of Xiph's servers is down. SVN doesn't work and neither
does their wiki.
David Brodbeck wrote:
Russell Jones wrote:
As for whether the OGG formats are patent-encumbered: as I said
before, by definition they are not. They just may not be backward
compatible.
They are not *known* to be patent-encumbered. It doesn't mean someone
couldn't pop up with a "subma
Russell Jones wrote:
> That is incorrect: http://www.vorbis.com/faq/#_fpsupport
Their link to the integer-only implementation is broken. But I believe
them that it exists. ;)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Russell Jones wrote:
> As for whether the OGG formats are patent-encumbered: as I said
> before, by definition they are not. They just may not be backward
> compatible.
They are not *known* to be patent-encumbered. It doesn't mean someone
couldn't pop up with a "submarine patent" that happens to
Rajko M. wrote:
On Sunday 25 February 2007 10:37, James Knott wrote:
some are overly broad, so as to make it difficult to avoid
infringing, if you develop something similar.
That is the whole problem.
I noticed it once reading patent relating thermal printers. While it talks
about c
David Brodbeck wrote:
JB wrote:
I thought about it a couple of times, but most of my music listening is
on portable devices or my car stereo. Hardware ogg/Vorbis players are
very thin on the ground. I'm not sure why, but I heard somewhere it's
because Vorbis requires floating-point math and
Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
I think not only MS, but OUR WHOLE SOCIETY should wake up and use ogg. When
will people decide enough is enough, we refuse to be held hostage by the
whims of arrogant patent holders?
TO THE BARRICADES, COMRADES! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR NDAs!
Hm. I don't think
JB wrote:
>> By the way, PEOPLE SHOULD STOP USING MP3!
>>
>
> Agreed
>
>
I thought about it a couple of times, but most of my music listening is
on portable devices or my car stereo. Hardware ogg/Vorbis players are
very thin on the ground. I'm not sure why, but I heard somewhere it's
b
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Monday 2007-02-26 at 01:43 -0500, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
> I still maintain that in casual conversation or email, when 99% of people
> say "ogg," they are not really talking about ogg the container but
> ogg/vorbis, the free and open audio forma
On Monday 26 February 2007 02:09, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
> On Monday 26 February 2007 2:05 am, Mathias Homann wrote:
> > I don't think that "People should ..." is within the scope of this
> > list. Put your preaching on slashdot. you might even get an article
> > there.
>
> Touched a nerve, did we
On Monday 26 February 2007 2:05 am, Mathias Homann wrote:
> I don't think that "People should ..." is within the scope of this
> list. Put your preaching on slashdot. you might even get an article
> there.
Touched a nerve, did we? All I did was reply to someone who wrote "MS
should..." and agree
Am Montag, 26. Februar 2007 schrieb Bryan S. Tyson:
> People should start [...]
I don't think that "People should ..." is within the scope of this
list. Put your preaching on slashdot. you might even get an article
there.
> --
> ***
> Powered by Kubuntu Linu
On Sunday 25 February 2007 18:50, John Andersen wrote:
> Courts will not take such a fine view. They will merely rule that
> ogg violates the mp3 patents the first time the RIAA finds an mp3 inside
> of an ogg file. That will be enough to scare off adoption of ogg by any
> hardware manufacturers
On Saturday 24 February 2007 21:49:29 Nick Zentena wrote:
> On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:07, John Andersen wrote:
> > It hasn't, up to now, been worth anyone's time to go after
> > off ogg because there is no one to sue, but as soon as any major
> > manufacturer makes devices that play ogg you
On Sunday 25 February 2007, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
> On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:07, John Andersen wrote:
> > ecause ogg is merely an encapsulation mechanism, implementers still
> > have to support a multitude of codecs in order to be able to decode what
> > might be hidden inside. Including mp
On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:07, John Andersen wrote:
> ecause ogg is merely an encapsulation mechanism, implementers still
> have to support a multitude of codecs in order to be able to decode what
> might be hidden inside. Including mp3 formats.
> You should get in the habit of being a littl
On Sunday 25 February 2007 10:37, James Knott wrote:
> some are overly broad, so as to make it difficult to avoid
> infringing, if you develop something similar.
That is the whole problem.
I noticed it once reading patent relating thermal printers. While it talks
about connection between contr
Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
> On Saturday 24 February 2007 21:44, M Harris wrote:
>
>> this is why software patents ARE EVIL!
>>
>
> Absolutely. If this keeps up, our whole society will grind to a halt.
>
> Meanwhile, people should have enough sense to switch to FREE, OPEN formats
> whenever one
On Saturday 24 February 2007 21:44, M Harris wrote:
> this is why software patents ARE EVIL!
Absolutely. If this keeps up, our whole society will grind to a halt.
Meanwhile, people should have enough sense to switch to FREE, OPEN formats
whenever one is available!
Bryan
--
***
On Saturday 24 February 2007 07:28, Kevin Donnelly wrote:
> I actually sympathise with Microsoft here - they paid whoever it was they
> (and the world and his dog) thought they should pay here, and then someone
> else comes out of the woodwork to claim 100 times that. Who's to say there
> won't be
On Saturday 24 February 2007, Nick Zentena wrote:
> On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:07, John Andersen wrote:
> > It hasn't, up to now, been worth anyone's time to go after
> > off ogg because there is no one to sue, but as soon as any major
> > manufacturer makes devices that play ogg you can bet
On Saturday 24 February 2007 16:07, John Andersen wrote:
>
> It hasn't, up to now, been worth anyone's time to go after
> off ogg because there is no one to sue, but as soon as any major
> manufacturer makes devices that play ogg you can bet it will attract
> lawyers like flies to dead fish.
ht
On Saturday 24 February 2007, Bryan S. Tyson wrote:
> I think not only MS, but OUR WHOLE SOCIETY should wake up and use ogg. When
> will people decide enough is enough, we refuse to be held hostage by the
> whims of arrogant patent holders?
What makes you so sure ogg is patent free?
Ogg is only a
On Friday 23 February 2007 4:10 pm, Richard Bos wrote:
> returned a $1.52 billion verdict against Microsoft Corp. after finding it
> infringed on two digital audio patents owned by Alcatel-Lucent."
> http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/microsoft-ordered-pay-alcatel-lucent-
>15/story.aspx?guid=%7B
On Saturday 24 February 2007 12:51, Damon Register wrote:
> As much as I dislike MS, I still want to see justice and fairness.
> When you are finished laughing, can anyone explain this? I have read
> the link and others but I must be missing something. If MS paid
> Fraunhofer what's the beef? Al
M Harris wrote:
On Friday 23 February 2007 15:10, Richard Bos wrote:
Next time use ogg, MS.
Ye.
... and its about time. M$ is on the way out
As much as I dislike MS, I still want to see justice and fairness.
When you are finished laughing, can anyone explain this? I h
On Friday 23 February 2007 15:10, Richard Bos wrote:
> Next time use ogg, MS.
Ye.
... and its about time. M$ is on the way out
--
Kind regards,
M Harris <><
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Be carefull with illegal MP3 codecs, you might be fined:
"SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- A federal court jury in San Diego on Thursday
returned a $1.52 billion verdict against Microsoft Corp. after finding it
infringed on two digital audio patents owned by Alcatel-Lucent."
http://www.marketwatch.
32 matches
Mail list logo
