• raldone01@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    Oh man. I hope Dolby looses. Patents are way too long and benefit so few that I think they shouldn’t be justified/exist in society. Also some stuff should be decided in court to be essential technology and patents/claims should then be dissolved/voided.

    • Paragone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I believe the error was in the AV1 license NOT having a “if you enforce patent-license-fees on this codec, THEN you can’t use this codec” type of coercion…

      ( I may have got the logic wrong, but there’s some kind of license that works that way, which other open codecs have used, apparently )

      Just ignoring that predators exist … provides NO protection from them.

      You have to make your license-agreement break abusers, … or you’re just helping them.

      _ /\ _

      • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I believe the error was in the AV1 license NOT having a “if you enforce patent-license-fees on this codec, THEN you can’t use this codec” type of coercion…

        I thought those provisions were usually enforced among the members of a patent pool, to ensure that any licensing customer can trust in the pools word to not be shaken down a second time by an individual pool member later.

        So since AM1 isn’t forming a patent pool to sell licenses, and Dolby isn’t part of the Alliance for Open Media, it wouldn’t really apply either way, no?

        Oh wait, actually there is something like this, see point 1.3 here: https://aomedia.org/license/patent-license/