●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load 500 More Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
bycommodoresloat ( 172735 ) * writes:
Apple, for its part, won't support Ogg Theora in QuickTime, expressing concerns over patents despite the fact that the codec can be used royalty-free.
Or perhaps their concern is precisely because of this fact?
twitter
facebook
byRadhruin ( 875377 ) writes:
Apple also doesn't want to support anything doesn't have off-the-shelf hardware acceleration. Until Apple can buy chips to decode Theora that will work in the iPhone, Theora is a no go for them.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byevanbd ( 210358 ) writes:
They build enough iPhones that, if they announced to vendors that they wanted such a chip, it would get built.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byAnonymous Coward writes:
The question becomes; will the extra per-unit decoding hardware and amortized design cost increase the cost of the iPhone/iPod/etc SOC by more than the per-device royalty for h264... Probably :)
bybenwaggoner ( 513209 ) writes:
Theora is a pretty weird codec. It's got a strange scan pattern, goes from bottom up instead of top down, and has lots of other rather unique aspects that could make a silicon implementation harder than its relative simplicity would suggest.
bywakingrufus ( 904726 ) writes:
It turns out, part of the iPhone's business model is to sell a newer version of the phone that is just slightly better than the last to their existing customers. So this should work out just fine.
byCulture20 ( 968837 ) writes:
They get the same dumbed down software solutions that they've been getting all along. Example: first generation iPhone can handle video and speech recognition on jailbroken phones, but only the 3GS gets those _software_ features added in vanilla iPhone OS 3.0.
bylibkarl2 ( 1010619 ) writes:
Bang!
●rent threshold.
byMicrolith ( 54737 ) writes:
No, if something being royalty-free were a downside they would not have included a BSD userspace with OS X. While Ogg Theora is royalty free, there are no -known- patent violations. As I recall back when Vorbis was getting off the ground, the implication was made that people with patents wouldn't care unless it got off the ground and then they would start looking for violations.
Basically, Theora and Vorbis are huge unknowns with potential patent bombs in them, regardless of what the developers and /. thinks. And all it takes is someone with a patent and the muster to enforce it and everyone who implemented them in their browser suddenly has a huge problem.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byStormReaver ( 59959 ) writes:
> While Ogg Theora is royalty free, there are no -known- patent violations.
The exact same argument can be made for the BSD base Apple uses for OSX. It doesn't matter that BSD went through a long copyright case way back when; both because that case was about copyrights rather than patents, and because unknown patent violations can easily have crept into the code base since then. In fact, I can safely go out on a limb and guarantee that every non-trivial piece of software (including everything Apple has) is violating software patents. Software patents are handed out by the USPTO like Bibles are handed out in prison.
Apple's argument that they won't use Theora because of potential patent problems rings completely hollow. I'm not going to speculate on their motives, but the one they gave is nonsense.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byTheTurtlesMoves ( 1442727 ) writes:
The same argument can be made for h.264. Even the agreement with MPEG-LA states that there is no guarantee that there are not other parts of the spec that may violate other patents not included in their patent portfolio. So there could be submarine patents there too.
bybjustice ( 1053864 ) writes:
The exact same argument can be made for the BSD base Apple uses for OSX.
So what? They're different cases, so a rational mind takes them one at a time and is free to come to different conclusions for each.
byesvinge ( 537163 ) writes:
Exactly. Apple is simply trying to block the use of a free standard because it is competitive with their proprietary nature. The fact that they won't add a free standard video codec to Quicktime is infuriating and makes me want to stage a protest at a Apple store just for fun. Similar to the protests against DRM that people staged a few years ago. I think that we need to stand up and demand accountability for this attempt to muscle out a real positive alternative to a region of software that is dominated by
●ent threshold.
byTheRaven64 ( 641858 ) writes:
Theora is a bit different from Ogg in this respect. Theora is based on VP3, which was both patented and commercially distributed for a number of years. If VP3 had been infringing someone else's patents, then they would likely have sued back when a company was making money from it. The patents that were required to VP3 were released by On2 under a free, irrevocable, license and then (I believe) allowed to lapse.
Dirac is in a weaker position; it is believed to be patent free, but no one has done a patent search to make sure and it is not based on an existing codec.
Parent
twitter
facebook
bybenwaggoner ( 513209 ) writes:
Theora is based on VP3, which was both patented and commercially distributed for a number of years. If VP3 had been infringing someone else's patents, then they would likely have sued back when a company was making money from it.
Well, I don't believe On2 ever made any money from VP3. VP6 with Flash 8+ was their big moneymaker. They also licensed the TrueMotion codecs for games back in the day, and even licensed their TrueMotion RT codec fof $5M to Microsoft for their never-shipped NetShow Theater product.
But it was pretty much the DotCom investment bubble that floated them from the late 90's through Flash 8. And they shrunk by a good 90% in staff from 2000 until VP6.
I met with them at a trade show a few months ago and realized I
byBinary Boy ( 2407 ) writes:
Absolutely - the notion of "submarine patents" rising up, should Theora take off, is not a new idea, and not specific to Apple. By mandating Theora in HTML5, you'd be risking the years of negotiations on the spec on the bet that there are no such patents - a bet I'd be surprised if any good Slashdot reader would take.
As others have pointed out, HTML has never mandated a specific image format reference in an IMG tag; a type of plugin referenced in OBJECT or EMBED; or the type of resource referenced in an A tag; it's outside it's scope. Let the standard focus on its scope, and let the market hash out the rest - it's not the end of the world to not have a single, mandated codec - in fact, I'd argue that having such a thing would unnecessarily limit our options - Theora is, to be kind, not the most efficient codec on the market; and the situation will likely only get worse. Don't hamstring HTML5 by hitching it to any particular codec.
Parent
twitter
facebook
bypbhj ( 607776 ) writes:
Absolutely - the notion of "submarine patents" rising up, should Theora take off, is not a new idea, and not specific to Apple. By mandating Theora in HTML5, you'd be risking the years of negotiations on the spec on the bet that there are no such patents - a bet I'd be surprised if any good Slashdot reader would take.
Ever cued for the bathroom, or swung on a swing ... well don't, imagine a submarine patent could turn up at any time and show your being a tortuous infringer. Seriously WTF was/is the US doing allowing submarine patents to continue.
W3C must be funded sufficiently to get patent searches done. Or simply put the Ogg Theora spec in patent form and apply for WO patents and get the statutory searches done.
In the UK you can request the proprietor of a patent give a statement as to whether you'd be infringing their
byDaniel_Staal ( 609844 ) writes:
Exactly. I hear 'royalty free' and I think of GIF, which was also royalty free... Until it wasn't. Which was an absolutely huge mess.
Honestly, if I were Apple and the Theora foundation offered a $100-per-million-device license saying basically 'we swear we are the sole authority on Ogg Theora, and you have a license from us to implement it to the spec' I'd be much happier than without it. Because then I'd have a set contract, spelling out the cost, and that if someone then comes along and says 'wait, we own this part of the spec, and you owe us $Xbillion' I could turn around to the Theora foundation and say 'Your breach of contract just cost me $Xbillion, and I expect you to pay that.' Basically, at that point the risk is Theora's, and not Apple's.
Apple is unwilling to take the risk that there are IP problems with the spec. It would take a lot of costly research and examinations for them to prove there aren't any, and there is no real benefit to them to spend the money and time. Translation: At free, it costs to much.
Parent
twitter
facebook
bymaxume ( 22995 ) writes:
The foundation's protection is really only worth what they are actually able to pay.
byIlgaz ( 86384 ) writes:
What if Apple is perfectly happy with AAC/H264/MPEG 4 base to put their billions to it?
People sound like Apple being a poor company who got abducted by MPEG body of standards which was essentially based on Quicktime specs. There is no such thing. Apple is happy and responsible for H264`s and MPEG4 base profiles take off.
The only company who isn`t happy with H264 and possibly whining is Microsoft. Each h264 video, legal or pirate is a hit to their lame wmedia division.
bypbhj ( 607776 ) writes:
Apple is unwilling to take the risk that there are IP problems with the spec.
And yet they risk the same thing with their internal closed specs all the time (the difference being the profit motive).
I don't know how it would go down in the USA, but in a sane jurisdiction then publication of the full specs would mean that the notional skilled man in the art, knowing the prior art, would recognise if their patent were to be infringed. Then failing to launch proceedings would be a tacit agreement that use of Ogg Theora within HTML5 didn't infringe their patents. And then we could all rid
byjonaskoelker ( 922170 ) writes:
Basically, Theora and Vorbis are huge unknowns with potential patent bombs in them
I take it Apple also doesn't implement topological sorting, then. That must be why I remember pressing "recalculate" in my spreadsheets.
No, wait... hmm. All I can conclude is that software patents suck.
byzuperduperman ( 1206922 ) writes:
> While Ogg Theora is royalty free, there are no -known- patent violations. ... Basically, Theora and Vorbis are huge unknowns with potential patent bombs in them..
If that's your benchmark then there is no technology on earth that will satisfy you. Just as you cannot prove a negative you will never be able to prove that there is not some submarine patent in any piece of tech you use. Unless someone identifies an actual patent problem this just sounds like complete FUD.
byjonwil ( 467024 ) writes:
Back when WinAmp first added OGG Vorbis support, the parent company of Nullsoft (AOL Time Warner) had a through patent investigation of OGG Vorbis carried out to make sure there were no such patents. Whilst its not an ironclad guarantee, the fact that the legal team at one of the worlds largest media companies has said that its safe to include in WinAmp without risk of being sued suggests that its probably OK to use.
byFuturepower(R) ( 558542 ) writes:
My understanding is that Apple doesn't want to work on QuickTime because it is buggy and no one wants to fix it.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byBinary Boy ( 2407 ) writes:
Well, you're wrong. There's a major release coming up.
byFuturepower(R) ( 558542 ) writes:
"Well, you're wrong."
I hope I'm wrong. I'm told that QuickTime is stable playing MPEG4 files, for example. I'm told that the implementation of QuickTime RTP (Real Time Protocol) has been buggy over several versions.
QuickTime does not behave well when a packet is lost.
Apple changes the QuickTime API without documenting it well.
QuickTime has historically been more stable on the Mac than the PC. I've had a problems with it on the PC.
byBinary Boy ( 2407 ) writes:
Wait - I wasn't responding to any of those statements - I was responding to you saying "Apple doesn't seem to want to update Quicktime" by pointing out that Quicktime is on the verge of its biggest update in a number of years.
As for the rest - I don't use RTP/RTSP with QT anymore; it is certainly stable playing MP4 profiles it supports; Quicktime documentation is generally pretty good, I don't know where you get the idea they don't document their APIs; more stable on Mac vs. PC may be true, but I don't see
byFuturepower(R) ( 558542 ) writes:
"... it is certainly stable playing MP4 profiles it supports..."
Agreed. And unstable or inoperable with other MP4 files. I'm told that even on the Mac, the free open source VLC Media player [videolan.org] is often better.
Quicktime on the PC has been very buggy in my experience. That has given the entire trademark a negative connotation.
My original point was intended to be that Apple has damaged its reputation with its poor handling of Quicktime, in much the same way that Sun damaged its reputation with its poor h
● current threshold.
byTheRaven64 ( 641858 ) writes:
You realise that Snow Leopard, shipping in September, comes with a new version of QuickTime, right? QuickTime 7 is not 64-bit clean, which is a large part of the reason for the rewrite.
byprofplump ( 309017 ) writes:
It may or may not be, but it's not really relevant -- adding support for a new codec and/or file format doesn't require fixing the underlying system.
bybeelsebob ( 529313 ) writes:
Ignoring the fact that apple are doing a complete quicktime rewrite for OS X 10.6 of course.
●rrent threshold.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
It is much harder to find a job than to keep one.
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...