Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 25 Jul 2003 08:17:41 EDT |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
--- Forwarded Message from [log in to unmask] ---
>Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 22:46:49 -0400
>From: [log in to unmask]
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #7086 legal status of Mpeg4 video codec
>References: <[log in to unmask]>
>In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
>User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.1
------------------
Quoting LLTI-Editor <[log in to unmask]>:
> --- Forwarded Message from "Michal Krynicki" <[log in to unmask]> ---
>
> >From: "Michal Krynicki" <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: "IALLT listserv" <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: legal status of Mpeg4 video codec
> >Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 15:08:56 -0500
> >Importance: Normal
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> Is anybody using VirutalDub to compress video materials and does anybody
> know what is the legal status of Microsoft Mpeg-4 video codec (as it appears
> in VirtualDub)? My question is essentially this: is it legal for me to use
> Microsoft Mpeg-4 Video codec that comes with VirtualDub to compress video
> materials for use in the language lab at an educational institution?
>
> Any help on this issue would be greatly appreciated.
sorry for delayed response, guess I was inundated in March.
MPEG-4 is an IEEE standard (the guys who came up with FireWire, WiFi, etc.) and
is not in fact owned by Microsoft (thank god!). As I understand it, many
corporations and interested parties contributed to the creation of the standard
(much like Bluetooth, also by IEEE) with the understanding that once finalized
it's fair game. I suspect there is a licensing fee negotiated between the
manufacturer of the software application (VirtualDub, Quicktime, Discreet
Cleaner, etc.) and IEEE, a cost which gets passed to the consumer in the
software license. The format itself is non-proprietary, just as we don't have
to pay for using/making jpegs (but we certainly pay for Photoshop).
related note: Hyrogenaudio recently compared AAC codec software, and apparently
Quicktime came out on top:
http://rarewares.hydrogenaudio.org/test/aac128test/presentation.html
Hope this helps, and if I erred in any details, fellow subscribers please
advise. Also: can someone please contact me off-list about the Digital
Exchange? I thought it sounded very interesting, but couldn't make it to that
particular SIG in Ann Arbor.
thanks,
Zach
|
|
|