On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 13:28 -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
On 5/22/07, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there a current patent on jpeg? FSF has encouraged people to use
> jpeg in the past and the wikipedia article mizmo pointed to seems to say
> that the company that was asserting patent rights has had its patent
> invalidated and is no longer pursuing any claims.
> wikipedia article:
> Link from the wikipedia article::
Disclaimer: "I'm not a lawyer. I rather use with paten-free format"
What am I supposed to see there? I clicked on the link for "What is the
patent situation with jpeg?" and found this:
For the JPEG standard, IS 10918-1 no patent declarations were received
prior to its publication that, in the opinion of the committee at the
time, applied to the baseline implementation.
2002, it became widely publicised that one or more companies were making
claims in some countries that they had patents which they believed read
on the original JPEG standard IS10918-1. The JPEG Committee produces
standards, which have a global basis, and are unable to comment on the
validity of such claims, or potential infringement by particular
implementations within specific jurisdictions. No such claims have (at
January 2004) been registered formally through the appropriate channels
at ISO and ITU-T, so far as the Webmaster is aware.
Googling has shown more citations of the Fogent Patent which, as noted
earlier, has been both ruled invalid and has expired, and some
information about optional features of JPEG which web browsers don't
understand which are patented but nothing else (For example, _ and
Basically, I have yet to see any indication that there are current,
valid patents on jpeg so I don't understand why you think it does not
qualify as a "patent-free format".
_: Jpeg groups FAQ on possible jpeg patents
_: JFIF entry which shows no known patents
_: JPEG entry which shows only the Fogent patent claim