[theora] Theora patent question

[Remco]

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 20:16, Jason Self <jason.self at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 10, 2009, at 11:02 AM, Shayne Wissler wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Jason Self <jason.self at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Your original statement was that Theora must infringe on
>>> something simply due to how the patent system works. The most
>>> constructive thing to do if you truly believe that Theora must
>>> infringe on something, is to take the time to come up with specific
>>> evidence.
>>
>> Are you aware of how many software patents are filed on a yearly
>> basis? Have you ever actually read any software patents? Because your
>> statement implies to me that the answer to both of these questions is:
>> No.
>
> While it's true that there are lots of software patents granted each
> year, that fact is actually irrelevant because the number of patents
> to investigate is actually fixed: Think about when Theora made its
> first public appearance. Any patent granted after that date cannot
> threaten Theora because of the prior art.

While we're on the topic, since we have our own 'defensive patent
troll' in the Open Invention Network, could that be used to protect
Theora and Vorbis? I see that they are not included in the protected
list[1] at the moment, while FLAC is specifically mentioned to be
protected.

-- 
Remco

[1] http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_linuxdef.php