[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: MPEG in general Was: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?

On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 04:03:37PM +0000, Will Newton wrote:
> On Saturday 08 Jan 2005 15:46, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > > And every set top box manufacturer pays for their MPEG-2 (or MPEG-4)
> > > licenses.
> >
> > Those are the patents for the transport mechanisms. Still not the decoders.
> Sigh. You seem to have a talent for picking subjects for argument that you 
> know nothing about.

Your talent appears to be argumentum ad hominem...

> Go study the licensing scheme and patent portfolio for 
> MPEG-2 and tell me how you can get around the motion compensation and 
> prediction patents for example[1] or the alternate scan patents,

By not encoding anything. These are patents on methods of
encoding. (They also appear to have patents on various postprocess
filtering methods, mostly in hardware; presumably the set-top box
manufacturers license and use these as well).

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: