Mesa Can Now Be Built With Select Video Codecs Disabled For Software Patent Concerns

[ssokolow]

My fear is that unless your gpu vendor provides proper switches and licencing to mesa then users of opensource gpu drivers might be forced to subscribe to a paid repository of the official distro or build their own to get a frankendistro.

That is a concern with Mesa being MIT. Even the GPLv2 explicitly prevents this by ensuring that, if they distribute a build of such a thing to you, they're required to give you GPLed source of the whole thing on request that you can then legally share with the world.

[shmerl]

Heh, mentioning a patent troll by name (MPEG-LA) in the commit message? That's a new one.

[stormcrow]

That is a concern with Mesa being MIT. Even the GPLv2 explicitly prevents this by ensuring that, if they distribute a build of such a thing to you, they're required to give you GPLed source of the whole thing on request that you can then legally share with the world.

For legal regimes in which it matters, GPL v2 does not also grant a patent license to use the code. It was a glaring weakness that v3 is intended to address. That's what you end up with when naive programmers decide to try to change the world. The world slaps them back.

[ms178]

This work is just pleasing the rent seekers, for no benefit of the end users. Not worth the developer time in my eyes.

[maarten]

Will it be possible to dynamically load support for these codecs under license?
I'm thinking about the use case of a distribution having removed all problematic codecs, such that users can add it back simply by installing some extra files + configuration.

[dlq84]

Will it be possible to dynamically load support for these codecs under license?
I'm thinking about the use case of a distribution having removed all problematic codecs, such that users can add it back simply by installing some extra files + configuration.

If that happens I'm sure someone is going to publish complete packages or you can compile it yourself

[stormcrow]

Will it be possible to dynamically load support for these codecs under license?
I'm thinking about the use case of a distribution having removed all problematic codecs, such that users can add it back simply by installing some extra files + configuration.

You end up like media codec situations where you have to either add or replace official packages from third party repositories, which may or may not break your system, to get full functionality (libdvdcss, gstreamer encumbered plugins, ffmpeg, etc.) It's a user hostile change, but it also helps keep people and organizations with few resources from getting sued by trolls and entities with deep pockets when that's a concern. Trust me, fighting off lawsuits can bankrupt all but the richest individuals.

[OneTimeShot]

Fortunately the only MPEG codec that is actually relevant is h264, and that is coming up on 20 years old next year...

...if you can live without the later-added features (3d TV anyone?), patents won't be a problem soon.

[CommunityMember]

Fortunately the only MPEG codec that is actually relevant is h264, and that is coming up on 20 years old next year...

...if you can live without the later-added features (3d TV anyone?), patents won't be a problem soon.

Depends on your definition of soon. One of the early patents ended up with a nearly 4 year extension, so the current estimate is ~2027 to be (mostly) sure you are not considered to be infringing.

[OneTimeShot]

Depends on your definition of soon. One of the early patents ended up with a nearly 4 year extension, so the current estimate is ~2027 to be (mostly) sure you are not considered to be infringing.

There are a lot of features that were added later (the 2007 patents were for DVD h264 - SVC, multi-angle, subtitles, etc), but the timer starts from first public disclosure which was 2003. The basic patents were applied for *before* public disclosure. If you listen to the MPEG-LA, h264 is patented until 2035... but that's just because they add a new optional feature every few years...

You'll be able to use the original 19 year old h264 reference decoder without paying license from next year. You just can't use features added after 2003. Helpfully, h264 is backward compatible - so the newer features are ignored by the reference decoder.