Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: ISO to withdraw JPEG standard
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 05:43:45 -0400
------ Forwarded Message From: Nathan Cochrane <ncochrane () theage fairfax com au> Organization: The Age newspaper Reply-To: ncochrane () theage fairfax com au Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 13:05:40 +1000 To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: ISO to withdraw JPEG standard Hi Dave How does one view the claims of a company aggressively pursuing intellectual property claims when it is seemingly breaching copyright laws by reproducing in whole articles published about it on its website? I see no "reproduced with permission" disclosure on several print stories scanned in at Forgent's press page: http://www.forgentnetworks.com/company/press_room/in_the_news.shtml eg: Austin-American Statesman Patented Potential - Struggling tech companies mine their intellectual property for cash http://www.forgentnetworks.com/company/press_room/AAS_07-08-02.pdf CNBC's Morning Call with Ted David http://www.forgentnetworks.com/company/press_room/NDA21086_01.mpeg Network World Forgent Creates Video Management Pack http://www.forgentnetworks.com/company/press_room/Network_World_06-24-02.pdf Investor's Business Daily Forgent Forges Video Network As Demand For Conferencing Rises http://www.forgentnetworks.com/company/press_room/IBD_07-05-02.pdf etc --- No more JPEGs - ISO to withdraw image standard By Andrew Orlowski in London Posted: 23/07/2002 at 16:39 GMT The ISO standards body will take the unprecedented step of withdrawing the JPEG image format as a formal standard if Forgent Networks, a small Texan company, continues to demand royalties on a seventeen-year old patent. ... According to Richard Clark, JPEG committee member and JPEG.org webmaster, Forgent's royalty grab - coming after two decades of royalty-free use - means that ISO is obliged to withdraw the specification. "Under ISO terms, formally you can only have a standard you can implement on free or RAND terms. "Reasonable and non discriminatory (RAND) terms are typically published, and the same for everyone. It's clear that Forgent's claims are not RAND. $15 million doesn't sound like free to me, and Forgent is not publishing the terms of their licensing. MORE http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/26339.html -- Nathan Cochrane Deputy IT Editor :Next: The Age and Sydney Morning Herald http://www.next.theage.com.au **************************************************************************** ***** This email and any files transmitted with it may be legally privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must not disclose or use the information contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please notify us by return email and permanently delete the document. **************************************************************************** ***** ------ End of Forwarded Message For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- IP: ISO to withdraw JPEG standard Dave Farber (Jul 24)