• Venia Silente@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    We all knew this was going to happen one day or another.

    Where’s Theora these days, byw? Wasn’t it the encoding blessed by the license druids?

  • berty@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 hours ago

    The title is a bit misleading. What does that mean for the future of AV1?

    • Sasquatch@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      if Dolby wins, everyone implementing AV1 (or maybe just parties that profit from it?) will have to pay Dobly royalties, even though AV1 is royalty-free

  • 4am@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    ·
    14 hours ago

    So just to be clear for all of you:

    Dolby is not a creator of AV1, Dolby is not in charge of licensing decisions for AV1. All companies involved in HVEC and AV1 have not performed bait and switch.

    What has happened is that Dolby alleges that they already have a patent on parts of what makes AV1 work. This may be an accident, or maybe someone stole Dolby’s tech. This may be something that can be fixed by changing how the software works, without breaking the file format.

    It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.

    Also, I’ve been saying it for 30 years at this point, and I will keep saying it: FUCK patents, software patents especially, and fuck the stupid system of capitalism for making them necessary

      • wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        41 minutes ago

        Which is a damn good point. If you don’t protect a patent in a reasonable time frame I believe you lose the right to protect it. If Dolby has had this patent for a long time, and allowed it to become part of a standard, it may be a quick dismissal of the case.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Dolby: we have a patent that ugh let’s you do shit to a file so it comes out in another format. We own all formats now and forever!

      • Virtvirt588@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Thats what ambiguity enables, a logical fallacy that let’s evil corpos to do as they please. And thats basically capitalism, or even feudalism at this point.

      • wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        37 minutes ago

        5 year patents should exist IMHO. I think that’s a reasonable chance to monetise an invention. Short enough to remove the use of patents as munitions between companies.

        After that it’s open season and you’ve allowed society to use it in any way in return for that 5 year protection.

      • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I agree. It‘s the only way to actually overcome capitalism. Same rules for all is important of course.

  • network_switch@lemmy.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Screw Dolby. I’ll only ever encode in AV1 and in the future AV2. HEVC won’t ever be ubiquitous like h.264 and VVC has already had support dropped by Intel processors after only one generation of hardware support. 6 years after the standard was finalized and VVC is still practically non-existent in consumer hardware

    • Rekall Incorporated@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      For what it’s worth, HEVC seems to have much better hardware support than AV1.

      AV1 encodes are also extremely rare when it comes to unofficial content releases.

    • JohnWorks@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Til Intel had and dropped support for VVC. Also TIL it’s 6 years old I thought it was still in active development.

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Rather, the AV1 specification was developed after many foundational video coding patents had already been filed, and AV1 incorporates technologies that are also present in HEVC.

    Like file()

    • Shirasho@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      ·
      17 hours ago

      This wording is wild. They did not say that AV1 uses patented material - they said that AV1 includes some technologies that are in HEVC. Dolby doesn’t have a case, and they know it. They are trying to use wording that twists the truth to make it sound like they are in the right.

        • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Yes, but it’s also the natural conclusion to “so technically the rules say…”

      • Cort@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I read it as Dolby saying av1 uses the same patented technology from hevc, and Dolby holds those patents.

        • five82@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Even though the AV1 spec was finalized 8 years ago, the HEVC patent mess was well known back then. I know that AOM put a lot of effort into working around patent problems so it will be interesting to see how this plays out. Google, Amazon, Netflix, Meta, Apple and the rest of AOM all have a lot on the line if the patent trolls win.

    • chillpanzee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The license is royalty free. AOMedia requires it’s contributors to contribute royalty free, and AOMedia has worked hard to ensure it doesn’t infringe anyone else’s IP, but that doesn’t stop other companies (some patent trolls) from asserting “You can’t do xyz without infringing some obscure patent I own.” These companies (like Dolby) target the companies that license AV1, and say “You’ve infringed my IP. Pay me $x per product that implements AV1, or I will sue you for much greater damages.” So AV1 really is licensed royalty free, what we have here is a third party that isn’t part of AOMedia (that really liked making money the old way) trying to extract revenue on dubious claims of patent essentiality.

      The fun part is that nobody really knows (or cares) whether AV1 is really infringing any IP. They know that the threat of litigation is likely to induce enough people to just pay that the whole charade is worth it. And perhaps ironically, the companies like Dolby want to litigate even less than the companies they are threatening because litigation tends to be a winner take all thing. If they lose, then nobody pays them; not even the companies they bullied into paying. The video codec IP world has operated this way for decades. This is what AOMedia hoped to change. It’s Governing Members are some heavy hitters. If they were to defend AV1, they could easily out-muscle players like Dolby. That might happen, but these sorts of things play out over a very long time horizon.