Attached Link: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/26339.html

Not sure if folks have heard about this or not, but a recent patent claim regarding JPEG compression may cause some companies (including Microsoft and other software manufacturers) to eliminate support for the JPEG format. I think there's going to be a lot of back and forth on the issue, but wanted let folks know- I've included a link with more info(other articles available on the same site, as well).

-Sage

I heard about it. Frankly, I think it's going to blow over like CompuServe's GIF royalty issue.

They're high if they think I'll stop using it.

Ask me a question, and I'll give you an answer.

I doubt very much that this company with the patent could afford the legal cost of suing one more than a handful of the users of JPEG. Some large companies like Adobe might just pay them off like they did Compuscurge, but there are literally thousands of pieces of software that, including lots of freeware, that use JPEG technology. It's too deeply in place as a standard, ISO backing or not. I suspect that if this texan company wants to enforce their patent rights, they'll only do so to make a quick buck off some of the industries larger players (Adobe, Corel, Quark, etc...) For us, nothing will change except maybe photoshop will go up a few bucks next release. -Adam

You're right about the large companies, terminusnord- Sony has already paid the company $15 million. That's one of the concerns of people within the industry now- that the company has the funds to pursue additional legal action against other companies. My concern isn't that we won't be able to use the technology, but that it won't be supported by software in the future- what if the next version of Internet Explorer didn't support JPG files, for example? Far-fetched (and unlikely), I know, but something to think about...

$15 Million is a nice chunk of change to a small company, but one that Microsoft could match. Bill Gates's net worth fluctuates by hundreds of millions of dollars daily. He's probably got the 15 mill in his wallet... I don't think anyone's likely to get too badly hurt in this situation really. Those Texans will get what their patent is worth to the larger companies, and I very much doubt they'd want to burn it all up in litigation trying to bankrupt smaller companies and individuals that don't want to go along with the licensing. -Adam

It's only going away for new software if the lawyer for the ISO is an idiot. Laches, failure to protect a patent, etc. The deal is, new management came in and started this up after the company literally abandoned the patent. Its public domain now by any sense of the word and anyone that thinks they can stop this freight train is nuts. If a court rules against the ISO standard, then its gonna be for one reason only - stupidity. I cannot think of a more clear cut example of public domain than this.

15 mil in his wallet...LMAO!!!

I notice in the article that the patent becomes invalid in 2004... This looks to me as a pretty desperate attempt from a small software company to get some revenue from a patent they bought in 1997. No litigations against major software companies such as Microsoft, Adobe etc will become settled before 2004, their lawyers are artists when it comes to stalling litigation processes. I wouldn't worry about future support for jpeg. This is an established standard, regardless of if ISO supports it or not. A small, desperate Texas software company with a disputable patent claim (not an uncommon thing in the US with it's highly questionnable patent laws) will not change that.

I believe it is a particular compression method used by jpg (it uses any of several compression methods similar in effect to the way we use plugins) not the format itself that is to blame for this. Developers are as jealous of the use of their compression methods as artists are about textures. Of note, a few years ago compuserve tried to "close down" gif files and charge royalties for their use. There are now compression methods in gif format that cannot be used freely, although I've noticed the gif format itself is still freely used. I don't think that jpg format itself will be sucessfully "closed down" any more than the gif format was. I could be wrong, afterall . . .

Who? What? When? Where? Why? Hedy Baker. Forgent Industries. now - 2004. Texas. greed.

Yep, greed. They did no work on it; they have no moral rights.

I posted this awhile ago and it got buried in the off topic forum. If's it a real, enforcable patent then they by all means should get money from it. But it's highly skeptical that they waited some five years to start litigation. Unless the delay was them getting their horses in a row.

Ya mean its all a joke ? "Arrrgh..." as Charlie Brown would say.

Nahh, jokes are supposed to be funny.