X-Git-Url: http://pere.pagekite.me/gitweb/homepage.git/blobdiff_plain/89865fb93d3956686dafd3f0a9b234bbb4d7b113..44cb6e5137c85a3c8d020467b2d1211365b19fe2:/blog/archive/2010/12/12.rss diff --git a/blog/archive/2010/12/12.rss b/blog/archive/2010/12/12.rss index fe1c399141..318bb38996 100644 --- a/blog/archive/2010/12/12.rss +++ b/blog/archive/2010/12/12.rss @@ -608,5 +608,167 @@ Congressman of the Republic of Perú.</p> + + Is Ogg Theora a free and open standard? + http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html + http://people.skolelinux.org/pere/blog/Is_Ogg_Theora_a_free_and_open_standard_.html + Sat, 25 Dec 2010 20:25:00 +0100 + +<p><a href="http://www.digistan.org/open-standard:definition">The +Digistan definition</a> of a free and open standard reads like this:</p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>The Digital Standards Organization defines free and open standard +as follows:</p> + +<ol> + +<li>A free and open standard is immune to vendor capture at all stages +in its life-cycle. Immunity from vendor capture makes it possible to +freely use, improve upon, trust, and extend a standard over time.</li> + +<li>The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit +organisation, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an +open decision-making procedure available to all interested +parties.</li> + +<li>The standard has been published and the standard specification +document is available freely. It must be permissible to all to copy, +distribute, and use it freely.</li> + +<li>The patents possibly present on (parts of) the standard are made +irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.</li> + +<li>There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.</li> + +</ol> + +<p>The economic outcome of a free and open standard, which can be +measured, is that it enables perfect competition between suppliers of +products based on the standard.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>For a while now I have tried to figure out of Ogg Theora is a free +and open standard according to this definition. Here is a short +writeup of what I have been able to gather so far. I brought up the +topic on the Xiph advocacy mailing list +<a href="http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/advocacy/2009-July/001632.html">in +July 2009</a>, for those that want to see some background information. +According to Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves and Monty Montgomery on that list +the Ogg Theora specification fulfils the Digistan definition.</p> + +<p><strong>Free from vendor capture?</strong></p> + +<p>As far as I can see, there is no single vendor that can control the +Ogg Theora specification. It can be argued that the +<a href="http://www.xiph.org/">Xiph foundation</A> is such vendor, but +given that it is a non-profit foundation with the expressed goal +making free and open protocols and standards available, it is not +obvious that this is a real risk. One issue with the Xiph +foundation is that its inner working (as in board member list, or who +control the foundation) are not easily available on the web. I've +been unable to find out who is in the foundation board, and have not +seen any accounting information documenting how money is handled nor +where is is spent in the foundation. It is thus not obvious for an +external observer who control The Xiph foundation, and for all I know +it is possible for a single vendor to take control over the +specification. But it seem unlikely.</p> + +<p><strong>Maintained by open not-for-profit organisation?</strong></p> + +<p>Assuming that the Xiph foundation is the organisation its web pages +claim it to be, this point is fulfilled. If Xiph foundation is +controlled by a single vendor, it isn't, but I have not found any +documentation indicating this.</p> + +<p>According to +<ahref="http://media.hiof.no/diverse/fad/rapport_4.pdf">a report</a> +prepared by Audun Vaaler og Børre Ludvigsen for the Norwegian +government, the Xiph foundation is a non-commercial organisation and +the development process is open, transparent and non-Discrimatory. +Until proven otherwise, I believe it make most sense to believe the +report is correct.</p> + +<p><strong>Specification freely available?</strong></p> + +<p>The specification for the <a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/">Ogg +container format</a> and both the +<a href="http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/">Vorbis</a> and +<a href="http://theora.org/doc/">Theora</a> codeces are available on +the web. This are the terms in the Vorbis and Theora specification: + +<blockquote> + +Anyone may freely use and distribute the Ogg and [Vorbis/Theora] +specifications, whether in private, public, or corporate +capacity. However, the Xiph.Org Foundation and the Ogg project reserve +the right to set the Ogg [Vorbis/Theora] specification and certify +specification compliance. + +</blockquote> + +<p>The Ogg container format is specified in IETF +<a href="http://www.xiph.org/ogg/doc/rfc3533.txt">RFC 3533</a>, and +this is the term:<p> + +<blockquote> + +<p>This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to +others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it +or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and +distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, +provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are +included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this +document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing +the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other +Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing +Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined +in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to +translate it into languages other than English.</p> + +<p>The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be +revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>All these terms seem to allow unlimited distribution and use, an +this term seem to be fulfilled. There might be a problem with the +missing permission to distribute modified versions of the text, and +thus reuse it in other specifications. Not quite sure if that is a +requirement for the Digistan definition.</p> + +<p><strong>Royalty-free?</strong></p> + +<p>There are no known patent claims requiring royalties for the Ogg +Theora format. +<a href="http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=65782">MPEG-LA</a> +and +<a href="http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/30/237238/Steve-Jobs-Hints-At-Theora-Lawsuit">Steve +Jobs</a> in Apple claim to know about some patent claims (submarine +patents) against the Theora format, but no-one else seem to believe +them. Both Opera Software and the Mozilla Foundation have looked into +this and decided to implement Ogg Theora support in their browsers +without paying any royalties. For now the claims from MPEG-LA and +Steve Jobs seem more like FUD to scare people to use the H.264 codec +than any real problem with Ogg Theora. + +<p><strong>No constraints on re-use?</strong></p> + +<p>I am not aware of any constraints on re-use.</p> + +<p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p> + +<p>3 of 5 requirements seem obviously fulfilled, and the remaining 2 +depend on the governing structure of the Xiph foundation. Given the +background report used by the Norwegian government, I believe it is +safe to assume the last two requirements are fulfilled too, but it +would be nice if the Xiph foundation web site made it easier to verify +this.</p> + +<p>It would be nice to see other analysis of other specifications to +see if they are free and open standards.</p> + + +