Re: [ros-svn] [mbosma] 20952: Delete libjpeg because sedwards and greatlord thought we should wait with jpeg support until the patent expired. If someone got a different opinion please take the issue to ros-dev.
Hi folks,
Delete libjpeg because sedwards and greatlord thought we should wait
with jpeg support until the patent expired. If someone got a different opinion please take the issue to ros-dev.
Deleted files: vendor/libjpeg/
I hereby "take the issue to ros-dev", because I have a different opinion. ReactOS is filled with patented (to more and lesser extent, ranging from SEH to scrollbars, I kid you not) features, and I believe it is hypocritical to simply remove one of them. I don't know the details on the libjpeg patent, but I do know that linux distributions use libjpeg as well, and I haven't seen them remove it yet. I officially request a vote to revert this commit.
Thanks for reading,
mf.
HI I am sick of this talk in ros this question alwasy comes back each month about seh, jpg and some other pantent
SEH panrtet is not affect ros, we handler it diffent.
jpg pentent will end at end of oct this hear first then we can implement jpg support in ros
scrobars pantent was first pantent by apple and later it was invaild,
----- Original Message ----- From: "mf" mf@mufunyo.net To: "ReactOS Development List" ros-dev@reactos.org Sent: den 20 January 2006 18:05 Subject: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-svn] [mbosma] 20952: Delete libjpeg because sedwards and greatlord thought we should wait with jpeg support until the patent expired. If someone got a different opinion please take the issue to ros-dev.
Hi folks,
Delete libjpeg because sedwards and greatlord thought we should wait
with jpeg support until the patent expired. If someone got a different opinion please take the issue to ros-dev.
Deleted files: vendor/libjpeg/
I hereby "take the issue to ros-dev", because I have a different opinion. ReactOS is filled with patented (to more and lesser extent, ranging from SEH to scrollbars, I kid you not) features, and I believe it is hypocritical to simply remove one of them. I don't know the details on the libjpeg patent, but I do know that linux distributions use libjpeg as well, and I haven't seen them remove it yet. I officially request a vote to revert this commit.
Thanks for reading,
mf. _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:05:11 +0100 mf mf@mufunyo.net wrote:
Hi folks,
Delete libjpeg because sedwards and greatlord thought we should wait
with jpeg support until the patent expired. If someone got a different opinion please take the issue to ros-dev.
Deleted files: vendor/libjpeg/
I hereby "take the issue to ros-dev", because I have a different opinion. ReactOS is filled with patented (to more and lesser extent, ranging from SEH to scrollbars, I kid you not) features, and I believe it is hypocritical to simply remove one of them. I don't know the details on the libjpeg patent, but I do know that linux distributions use libjpeg as well, and I haven't seen them remove it yet. I officially request a vote to revert this commit.
There's a lot of FUD going on here.
For one thing, our SEH method is not patented. It is a novel method devised by KJK which doesn't use compiler support as claimed by the borland patent.
There's a lot of FUD going on here.
For one thing, our SEH method is not patented. It is a novel method devised by KJK which doesn't use compiler support as claimed by the borland patent. -- Here's a simple experiment. Stand on a train track between two locomotives which are pushing on you with equal force in opposite directions. You will exhibit no net motion. None the less, you may soon begin to notice that something important is happening.
The OS-level SEH does use frames on a stack.
Casper
art yerkes wrote:
There's a lot of FUD going on here.
I agree wholeheartedly.
For one thing, our SEH method is not patented.
For another thing, the patent appears to be this:
<== The JPEG spec defines two different "back end" modules for the final output of compressed data: either Huffman coding or arithmetic coding is allowed. The choice has no impact on image quality, but arithmetic coding usually produces a smaller compressed file. On typical images, arithmetic coding produces a file 5 to 10 percent smaller than Huffman coding. (All the file-size numbers previously cited are for Huffman coding.)
Unfortunately, the particular variant of arithmetic coding specified by the JPEG standard is subject to patents owned by IBM, AT&T, and Mitsubishi. Thus *you cannot legally use JPEG arithmetic coding* unless you obtain licenses from these companies. (Patent law's "experimental use" exception allows people to test a patented method in the context of scientific research, but any commercial or routine personal use is infringement.)
I recommend that people not use JPEG arithmetic coding; the space savings isn't great enough to justify the potential legal hassles. In particular, arithmetic coding *should not* be used for any images to be exchanged on the Internet. Even if you don't care about US patent law, other folks do. /==>
I believe that something like that is easily commented out, and does not require a removal of the entire lib. *sings the FUD song*
mf
I hereby "take the issue to ros-dev", because I have a different opinion. ReactOS is filled with patented (to more and lesser extent, ranging from SEH to scrollbars, I kid you not) features, and I believe it is hypocritical to simply remove one of them. I don't know the details on the libjpeg patent, but I do know that linux distributions use libjpeg as well, and I haven't seen them remove it yet. I officially request a vote to revert this commit.
Thanks for reading,
mf.
I agree. Make the support optional instead and let the user choose which features to enable. ReactOS frame-based exception handling is also covered by a patent. Of course, if you disable that feature then ReactOS is practically unusable ;-( But my point is, let the user choose. The user can buy a license for these patent covered features if they need one.
Casper
Hi,
I believe that something like that is easily commented out, and does not require a removal of the entire lib.
No, that is already disabled by default as far as I know, we are talking about another patent: U.S. Patent 4,698,672 http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=4,698,672 that will expire on *October 27, 2006.*
Also I'd also like to explain that this lib was never used. It did only import it into /vendor and not into /trunk/reactos/lib, so a revert of my delete would be pointless if none wants to write code that uses it. I do have imported it in my working copy, together with a almost done patch for jpeg-wallpaper loading, but I have decided not to commit it until *October 27, 2006.
*Here is a quote from interesting quote from wikipedia:
In 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002 Forgent Networks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgent_Networks asserted that it owns and will enforce patent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent rights on the JPEG technology, arising from a patent that had been filed in 1986 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986 (U.S. Patent 4,698,672 http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=4,698,672). The announcement has created a furor reminiscent of Unisys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unisys' attempts to assert its rights over the GIF http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIF image compression standard.
The JPEG committee investigated the patent claims in 2002 and are of the opinion that they were invalidated by prior art. Others have also concluded that Forgent doesn't have a patent that covers JPEG. Nevertheless, between 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002 and 2004 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004 Forgent was able to obtain about $90 million by licensing their patent to some 30 companies. In April 2004 Forgent sued 31 other companies to enforce further license payments. In July of the same year, a consortium of 21 large computer companies filed a countersuit, with the goal of invalidating the patent. However, as of July 2005, the battle is still ongoing ). Surprisingly, in contrast to the other major computer companies such as Sony and Philips, Microsoft has launched a major lawsuit against Forgent. In principle, the Forgent patent will expire in 2006.
The JPEG committee has as one of its explicit goals that their standards (in particular their baseline methods) be implementable without payment of license fees, and they have secured appropriate license rights for their upcoming JPEG 2000 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_2000 standard from over 20 large organizations.
PS: I did already write to mailing list once because of this. topic is "[ros-dev] libjpeg"
Best regards,
Maarten Bosma
-
art yerkes -
Casper Hornstrup -
Maarten Bosma -
Magnus Olsen -
mf