关于H.264和Ogg Theora的潜艇专利

我拙劣了一点这篇文章前几天是关于H.264,Ogg和专利的我写的时候:

If some patent troll decides H.264 violates a patent, they must go to court with MPEG LA, not individual licensees.

那是错的,我对这个错误感到遗憾没有什么可以阻止某人拥有他们认为H.264侵犯起诉个人被许可人的专利DF读者Joe Shaw通过电子邮件指出即使是用户被视为在没有许可的情况下侵犯他人专利的发明被认为是侵权者

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States or imports into the United States any patented invention during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent.

但我支持我的主要观点,即围绕H.264的专利情况比Ogg Theora更安全Ogg Theora可能违反了两套专利第一组是潜艇专利H.264也违反了第二组是MPEG-LA的H.264池专利。

If the holder of a submarine patent decides to sue over H.264, MPEG-LA can countersue using the patents in the H.264 pool (presuming that the submarine patent holder has some sort of video product, and is not a patent troll whose only business is extorting patent licensing fees)如果潜艇专利的持有者决定起诉Ogg Theora,Ogg Theora的用户实际上是非武装的。

至于第二组,Ogg Theora的支持者可以声称Ogg没有违反H.264池中的任何专利,但是MPEG-LA表示他们不相信If Ogg Theora takes off and becomes popular, would anyone be surprised if MPEG-LA started suing Ogg Theora users for licensing fees? I’d be surprised if they didn’t.

Ogg Theora没有专利只意味着Ogg Theora的开发商不会追求Ogg Theora用户的许可费用或主张任何限制这并不意味着持有者其他专利不会声称Ogg Theora违反专利。

所以如果你愿意承认H.264和Ogg Theora是vulnerable to patent claims, and wished to choose one over the other, the obvious choice (to me) would be the one that is both technically superior and is owned by a group that can ably defend itself in court, armed with patents of its own and experienced lawyers如果你不愿意承认Ogg Theora很容易受到专利索赔的影响,那么我怀疑你是否正在读这篇文章。

要清楚,我并不是想吓唬任何人使用或支持Ogg Theora我仍然认为谷歌在Chrome中的做法是最佳的:支持H.264和Ogg我的目的是起诉我们的专利制度,而不是Ogg Theora但只有被欺骗的人认为Ogg Theora--以及使用它的软件,比如Firefox--对于专利战来说比免于接受子弹的人更能免于专利战。

后记:看到Thom Holwerda批评我的分析, 和我的简短的回答

以前: GIF,H.264和专利
下一个: 将军的战争