Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split) (Read 10047 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm


Subband coding is NOT patented. 
Read patents very very carefully or don't read it.
Perceptional noise substitution is also NOT patented.

When reading patents it is necessary to find out what is EXACTLY patented.


Assuming this is correct, does this mean that it's possible that MPC could be patent free?  If not, perhaps because of legacy MP2 code/technology/etc, could it be made to be patent free without too much trouble?

I would really love to see MPC go Open Source at some point, but AFAIK the reason that it hasn't done so yet is because of possible patent issues.  If these issues don't exist though, then what is stopping this from happening?  The decoder is already open, so...?

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #1 –
Quote
Originally posted by Dibrom


Assuming this is correct, does this mean that it's possible that MPC could be patent free?  If not, perhaps because of legacy MP2 code/technology/etc, could it be made to be patent free without too much trouble?
[/b]
*No, at least not SV1...SV8.
*Philips subband patent can be removed, but
- this would significantly increase CPU load of decoder
- increase significantly latency
- then I would not use an equidistant subband filter

Quote
I would really love to see MPC go Open Source at some point, but AFAIK the reason that it hasn't done so yet is because of possible patent issues.


I don't think it is an patent issue. Originally it was planed to
* have a open source decoder
* closed source encoder
* pay patent fee
* for mppenc usage

problem was to sign a patent contract.
Ask Andree for more details.

Quote
If these issues don't exist though, then what is stopping this from happening?  The decoder is already open, so...?


I got the source under a NDA. Ask Andree Buschmann.
--  Frank Klemm

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #2 –
Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm
problem was to sign a patent contract. 
Ask Andree for more details.

I got the source under a NDA. Ask Andree Buschmann.
Frank, what's your opinion about this: would MPC gain advantage if the source code would be available (encoder binaries could be spread by 3rd parties), or staying closed source?

I've asked Andree about this, but never got a direct answer. IMO it would be only good if MPC source was available.
Juha Laaksonheimo

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #3 –
Quote
Originally posted by JohnV
Frank, what's your opinion about this: would MPC gain advantage if the source code would be available (encoder binaries could be spread by 3rd parties), or staying closed source?

I've asked Andree about this, but never got a direct answer. IMO it would be only good if MPC source was available.


Currently (for several months ;-) I try do divide the program into several parts.

- Frontend
- Lossless Coder
- Lossy Coder
- Psychoacoustic
- I/O Stuff

I think completely rewritten stuff I can publish.
--  Frank Klemm

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #4 –
Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm


Currently (for several months ;-) I try do divide the program into several parts.

- Lossless Coder
- Lossy Coder
(...)

I think completely rewritten stuff I can publish.


Will Musepack SV8 jump in lossless encoding ? Like the new WMA9 PRO ?

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #5 –
Quote
Originally posted by guruboolez
Will Musepack SV8 jump in lossless encoding ? Like the new WMA9 PRO ?
I think Frank means just the lossless coding part of the MPC encoder, meaning huffman coding etc..
Juha Laaksonheimo

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #6 –
I'm stupid... of course - he just said that yesterday about electronic sample. I'm sorry.
Thanx

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #7 –
Quote
Originally posted by Frank Klemm


Currently (for several months ;-) I try do divide the program into several parts.

- Frontend
- Lossless Coder
- Lossy Coder
- Psychoacoustic
- I/O Stuff

I think completely rewritten stuff I can publish.


In the future (far?) can we guess in a splitted and parallel experimental version of musepack without the patented stuff?
(as open source project of course)

Or that part is so strongly essential??  (for its popular quality)

Apart of this, Could you be personally interested in such direction, if maybe a viable possibility?
"Taking a jazz approach and concentrating on live playing, I wanted to use several different rhythm sections and vintage instruments and amps to create a timeless sound that's geared more around musicality and vibe than sonic perfection. The key was to write with specific rhythm sections in mind, yet leave open spaces for soloing." Lee Ritenour

MPC patents/encoder source availability (thread split)

Reply #8 –
Thread was splitted. Original thread:
AAC beaten at low bitrates, why?
Juha Laaksonheimo