Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Google's New VP8 Codec SDK Is Better, Faster

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    565

    Default

    I hope everyone starts using patented software, all the biggest companies, so that all hell will break loose and the USPTO will be cracked down upon for getting everyone into this mess to begin with.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    215

    Default

    SSE3? What about SSE2, which is supported on more CPU's...

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    972

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    Actually, the license was cooler than that.... it contained a single exception that overrode everything else -- if you look at it with the intention of, or use information pulled from it to attack google, then screw you, you have no right to even THINK about it and we'll sue your ass for license/copyright infringement until you're bankrupt.

    Now the real situation regarding patents and licensing is like this;
    Google it the one facing mpeg on this, effectively protecting everyone else. If mpeg attacks google, google is simply too big and no doubt has a bunch of patents in its portfolio that can PROBABLY be used to free up h.264. mpeg surely wouldn't attack google on this because if they did, google could probably force them to let h.264 out under GOOGLE'S licensing terms.
    I am also sure other companies might come to Google's aid if it was sued, if they hold other relevant patents or technology that can bolster Google's claims. In any event it's positive that MPEGLA will be thinking very hard about all the ramifications of even considering suing Google.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    Actually, the license was cooler than that.... it contained a single exception that overrode everything else -- if you look at it with the intention of, or use information pulled from it to attack google, then screw you, you have no right to even THINK about it and we'll sue your ass for license/copyright infringement until you're bankrupt.
    Where do you see this nonsense?

    Here is the IP exception:

    "This implementation" means the copyrightable works distributed by Google as part of the WebM Project.
    Google hereby grants to you a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, transfer, and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of this implementation of VP8, where such license applies only to those patent claims, both currently owned by Google and acquired in the future, licensable by Google that are necessarily infringed by this implementation of VP8. This grant does not include claims that would be infringed only as a consequence of further modification of this implementation. If you or your agent or exclusive licensee institute or order or agree to the institution of patent litigation against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that this implementation of VP8 or any code incorporated within this implementation of VP8 constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, or inducement of patent infringement, then any patent rights granted to you under this License for this implementation of VP8 shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed.
    All this does is simply revokes the suing parties use of patents that are part of WebM's portfolio. It does not, as you claim, "if you look at it with the intention of, or use information pulled from it to attack google, then screw you, you have no right to even THINK about it and we'll sue your ass for license/copyright infringement until you're bankrupt."

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Veerappan View Post
    He was making a pun. 'Bali' is only 1 letter off from 'Ball'. To release a version of a product could in this case be called a code drop.

    So:
    Release the version codenamed 'Bali'
    Becomes:
    Drop the ball.
    Also, they drop a ball in Times Square, NYC at the beginning of every year.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_Square_Ball

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sturmflut View Post
    FFMPEGs implementation still has its pros: it does not just use x86 optimizations, but also leverages existing DSP code for other platforms. For example I don't see any mention of ARM NEON optimizations done by Google, so they do not yet care about Android phones.
    ....
    it's Not a Problem really ,as more and more Fast SIMD get's written for 128bit NEON in x264 Today, then you will be able to simply use most of that for the x264 -vp8 and indeed the x264 -h262 output modes later

    so go and write that ARM v7 NEON SIMD you keep putting off and post a direct link to you're paste bin patch on #264-dev and get some advice on how to quickly improve/intigrate it.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •