Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> SanDisk faces MP3 licence dispute
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Electronics manufacturer SanDisk is facing a legal fight over its use
> | of popular MP3 compression technology.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | Italian patents company Sisvel alleges that SanDisk refuses to pay
> | licensing fees it needs to playback MP3 files.
> `----
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5312696.stm
>
> http://freshmeat.net/projects/mp32ogg/
This seems to be a new story. Anyone know what SanDisk specifically is
accused of, what their defence argument is, and which side has the
better case?
I think Sisvel is saying that MPEG 1 layer 3 audio (MP3) data can only
be played by using a patent-protected method. SanDisk seems to be
claiming that they have an alternate method to which the patent doesn't
apply.
Patent law still varies in different countries. It also happens,
apparently, that patent-owning companies don't go out and sue everyone
who might be infringing their property. They sue someone who will most
probably cave in and pay up. Then they use the winnings to sue someone
else. Alternatively, they sue Microsoft, and Microsoft buys their
entire company.
I don't think it's disputed that MPEG is patent-protected in many
jurisdictions. If anyone was going to get around it, I think it would
be the Chinese. I've been told, I don't know, that many Chinese-made
DVD players didn't pay a licensing fee to the inventors of DVD. And,
of course, lots of cheap DVD players also play MP3. (DVD is MPEG 2 up
to audio layer 2, right?)
One case I'm reminded of is cloning the BIOS of IBM PC. When IBM
started selling desktop computers to business, it wasn't the only PC to
run MS-DOS, but PC programmers often addressed hardware devices either
directly, or through the compact BIOS program built into the PC -
working through the operating system was much slower. For competitors
who wanted to make cheaper compatible models, the IBM hardware was
more-or-less off the shelf or duplicatable, but the BIOS was
copyrighted IBM software. Someone had to clone the program, write a
non-IBM version, to make it legal. (At first, they didn't, quite.)
Fast forward to 2006: your PC probably wasn't built by IBM in any real
sense.
On the other hand, there's the matter of GIF images. Patented data
format compression and/or un-compression method; licence owner lets it
catch on and then starts sending letters.
But then... is it GIF viewers or GIF encoders that were subject to
licence enforcement? That could matter in the Sandisk case because it
appears they're decoding MP3, not encoding it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3 - with a warning about missing
citations for statements - states that encoders /and/ decoders are
under the patent, but open source decoders - that is to say, players -
go for free.
Maybe they changed their mind about that?
Hmm... according to
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/digitalmusic/0,39029432,49273890,00.htm
three months ago Sandisk was /looking/ for an open source partner for
their new player. Which suggests that they don't have open source
now??
http://daniel.haxx.se/rockbox-sandisk-connection.html apparently is the
whole story about that.
I think the separate issue of media industry legislation against
encryption-breaking doesn't apply, on the grounds that MP3 is not an
encryption method.
But I also think they're in trouble.
|
|
