|
Re: OT: Is jpeg a true open standard without patents?
de Tim 05/27/2006 01:30
Ben wrote:
> John Jay Smith wrote:
>
>> But my question is this: is JPEG a totally open standard without a
>> patent attached to it?
>
> No, basically.
>
> "Forgent Networks, which two years ago said it would pursue royalties
> on its JPEG patent, has renewed its offensive.
>
> The compression patent used in the popular image format, (USPTO
> 4,698,672, or '672), was filed by Compression Labs in October 1986.
> This dormant company was acquired by Forgent Networks in 1997. In
> June 2002, Forgent announced that it had "sole and exclusive right to
> use and license all the claims" of '672 in all fields except satellite
> broadcasting. Widespread alarm and dismay accompanied the news that
> Forgent had persuaded Sony Corporation to pay $15m for use of the
> fees.
> The furore died down after the ISO threatened to withdraw
> standards-blessing from the format. ISO can only endorse royalty-free
> formats. However, Forgent claims to have netted $90m in various
> licensing royalties since then.
>
> Today's suit targets thirty industry refuseniks who Forgent says have
> rejected its royalty terms. These include Japanese consumer
> electronics giants JVC, Matsushita (Panasonic) and Ricoh; camera
> companies Fuji Photo Film, Agfa, Eastman Kodak; PC makers IBM, Dell,
> Apple, HP, Toshiba and Gateway; Xerox and Palm; and software
> companies including Adobe, Macromedia, and JASC."
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/23/forgent_jpeg_suit/
>
> Search the Register for Forgent to dig up any more you need to know :)
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060526-6930.html
--
Tim