Re: My solution (was: My (less-then-important) personal position)
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 09:53:34AM +0800, Ian McKellar wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 01:20:45AM +0200, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 09:56:05PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > > The algorithms to decode are proprietary. Even xanim can only offer some of
> > > the most common ones and at least some of them as binary modules.
> >
> > Does proprietary mean
> > a) patented
> > or
> > b) not reverse-engeenered yet
> >
> > In first case, we could make euro-anim.
>
> Proprietary, patented and difficult to reverse engineer. euro-anim probably
> wouldn't help as I'm pretty sure the companies who've developed the codecs
> have patented the algorithms as widely as they can. There only seem to be a
> few countries where software patents are not allowed.
>
> This is yet another reason to make the `non-FACIST' distribution - for people
> who live in countries where they actually have rights and their constitution
> is worth the paper its written on :-)
Their patents are void in whole Europe as far as computer programs are concerned
( article 52.5 of Munich Convention ).
Haven't anybody reverse-engineered them so far ?
Reply to: