Is "working on it" just open source FUD?

Is "working on it" just open source FUD?

Summary: The way to get to a royalty-free codec is to start with H.261, which was approved in 1989, outside the 17-year patent window. They can't use H.264, the latest implementation (used in MPEG4) because that requires payment of royalties.

TOPICS: Open Source, Oracle

Open Media StackSun is pondering an open source codec. No they're really working on it.

It even has a name. Open Media Stack. Part of the Open Media Commons initiative. Oh, it's royalty free. Look, here's a blog post. And a news release. (And a diagram, from the blog post.)

The way to get to a royalty-free codec is to start with H.261, a video compression standard approved in 1989, outside the 17-year patent window. They can't look at H.264 (used in MPEG4) because that requires payment of royalties.

So we go back a full human generation and grow from there. Probably with Xith Vorbis.

All of which sounds wonderful, except for one thing. Who's paying for all this work?

Sun indicates it's contributing, but how long will it take for them to replicate 20 years of codec progress on its own? And who is helping?

Asked all these interesting questions at last week's Open House Rob Glidden, global alliance manager for TV & Media at Sun, made an unintentioned funny. "Stay tuned," he said.

Smells like open source FUD to me.

Now wait, you say. Unfair, you say. Great projects start with a vision and a sponsor. Here Sun is offering both. Plus a structure in which to get it done.

Lemony Snicket, A Series of Unfortunate Events, from Amazon.comAll true. But with no clue on budgets, and no timelines, we're also staying tuned while the world goes on without us. Those royalty-bearing codecs aren't sitting still, and there are royalties to fund their development.

I would be far less skeptical and snarky on this if, say, Google were making the announcement. They have the money and bodies to get this done lickety-split.

I'm just afraid that with Sun we might be talking more Lemony Snicket.

Topics: Open Source, Oracle

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • The long term benefit

    I believe companies like Sun and IBM are starting to realize that its to their advantage to help build and ecosystem around open technologies...mainly an OS. This sill give them the platform to compete with the full MS stack and have deeper access into all parts of the stack. Things like this may just be aimed and increasing adoption rates to set up a platform that can be taken advantage of in the future.

    Or it could be FUD like you said. :-)
  • What's wrong with Dirac? (NT)

  • Is that codec written in java?

    Sun should better prove java capabilities using this project, sice they switched their moniker from Sun to Java.
    Linux Geek
  • Is "working on it" just open source FUD?

    Or ... are creativity and creative energies better spent in an environment of freedom and creativity?
    • Fr0thy - you need a middle ground

      While you're right, and open source counts on that freedom and creativity environment, you ALSO need someone somewhere who actually has an idea of a direction to steer things in.

      Otherwise, you end up with, in the late Hunter S. Thompson's immortal words, "a bunch of junkies building a missile to the moon because of rumors that the craters were full of smack...."