|
Home > Archive > Macromedia Flash Server > July 2006 > Are there any FMS/RTMP Patents?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Are there any FMS/RTMP Patents?
|
|
| hank williams 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| In my offlist discussion with Jay, he suggested the reason he believed Red5
was not on solid ground was that Adobe probably had patents around RTMP and
FMS that the Red5 team must have infringed to build the product.
I dont believe this is so, but I thought I would ask publicly.
As far as I know, in order to have and maintain a patent, it needs to be
prominent displayed on the product. I have not seen any such notices, but my
eyesight is not what it once was 
Has anybody seen any such notices? If so can they provide patent numbers?
Does anybody at Adobe claim any patents around FMS that the community should
be aware of? Certainly it is part of you legal as well as community
responsibility to make people aware of your patents so that no one will
accidentally infringe on your work.
Hank
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| Stefan Richter 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| I would be surprised if you would receive an answer to that on this list.
But I guess if you formally wrote to Adobe then they'd have to adress you...
Stefan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> [mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of
> hank williams
> Sent: 12 July 2006 13:38
> To: FlashComm Mailing List
> Subject: [FlashComm] Are there any FMS/RTMP Patents?
>
> In my offlist discussion with Jay, he suggested the reason he
> believed Red5 was not on solid ground was that Adobe probably
> had patents around RTMP and FMS that the Red5 team must have
> infringed to build the product.
>
> I dont believe this is so, but I thought I would ask publicly.
>
> As far as I know, in order to have and maintain a patent, it
> needs to be prominent displayed on the product. I have not
> seen any such notices, but my eyesight is not what it once was
>
> Has anybody seen any such notices? If so can they provide
> patent numbers?
> Does anybody at Adobe claim any patents around FMS that the
> community should be aware of? Certainly it is part of you
> legal as well as community responsibility to make people
> aware of your patents so that no one will accidentally
> infringe on your work.
>
> Hank
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
|
|
| hank williams 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| Yeah, but if the product is not properly labeled that may invalidate the
patent.
Regards
Hank
On 7/12/06, Stefan Richter <stefan-fMeCE+ULXElEfu+5ix1nRw@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> I would be surprised if you would receive an answer to that on this list.
> But I guess if you formally wrote to Adobe then they'd have to adress
> you...
>
> Stefan
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
_______
> FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
|
|
| Jay Charles 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| Hank... let's not put words in my mouth... shall we?
In both the onlist discussion and our offlist discussion I voiced my
concern that there may be patent and/or copyright issues at play, but I
never said that the folks behind Red5 *MUST* have infringed on them in
order to develop it. By changing MAY to MUST, you have turned my
suspicion into an accusation, and that's not what I had in mind.
Sorry list... I don't mean to have this discussion turned into some sort
of shoving match, but I don't want to be painted as some guy who has
something personal against Red5 or its developers.
-Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of hank
williams
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 8:38 AM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: [FlashComm] Are there any FMS/RTMP Patents?
In my offlist discussion with Jay, he suggested the reason he believed
Red5
was not on solid ground was that Adobe probably had patents around RTMP
and
FMS that the Red5 team must have infringed to build the product.
I dont believe this is so, but I thought I would ask publicly.
As far as I know, in order to have and maintain a patent, it needs to be
prominent displayed on the product. I have not seen any such notices,
but my
eyesight is not what it once was
Has anybody seen any such notices? If so can they provide patent
numbers?
Does anybody at Adobe claim any patents around FMS that the community
should
be aware of? Certainly it is part of you legal as well as community
responsibility to make people aware of your patents so that no one will
accidentally infringe on your work.
Hank
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| John Grden 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| Don't worry about it Jay, you're not the first person to be concerned and I
don't think any of us took it that way.
My thought is, Adobe is a TON more OS friendly that MM was. They've done
alot to contribute since the merger, but with that said, we most likely will
not hear about them "ok'ing" red5, openAMF, AMFPHP.
I DO think, and yes, I could be wrong, but with everything I've seen/heard,
they'll release AMF0/3 as well as RTMP specs - in due time of course, when
it makes most sense. I beleive they're considering/leaning towards this not
only because they're already primarily out there, but because of what it
does for the technology in being accepted as a platform.
That's my 2cents on it. Again, I don't know nuttin', I'm just giving my gut
feeling on it.
JG
On 7/12/06, Jay Charles <jay-/2BbR9jOFtJDNXj9fXT1TFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Hank... let's not put words in my mouth... shall we?
>
> In both the onlist discussion and our offlist discussion I voiced my
> concern that there may be patent and/or copyright issues at play, but I
> never said that the folks behind Red5 *MUST* have infringed on them in
> order to develop it. By changing MAY to MUST, you have turned my
> suspicion into an accusation, and that's not what I had in mind.
>
> Sorry list... I don't mean to have this discussion turned into some sort
> of shoving match, but I don't want to be painted as some guy who has
> something personal against Red5 or its developers.
>
> -Jay
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> [mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of hank
> williams
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 8:38 AM
> To: FlashComm Mailing List
> Subject: [FlashComm] Are there any FMS/RTMP Patents?
>
> In my offlist discussion with Jay, he suggested the reason he believed
> Red5
> was not on solid ground was that Adobe probably had patents around RTMP
> and
> FMS that the Red5 team must have infringed to build the product.
>
> I dont believe this is so, but I thought I would ask publicly.
>
> As far as I know, in order to have and maintain a patent, it needs to be
> prominent displayed on the product. I have not seen any such notices,
> but my
> eyesight is not what it once was
>
> Has anybody seen any such notices? If so can they provide patent
> numbers?
> Does anybody at Adobe claim any patents around FMS that the community
> should
> be aware of? Certainly it is part of you legal as well as community
> responsibility to make people aware of your patents so that no one will
> accidentally infringe on your work.
>
> Hank
> ________________________________________
_______
> FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
_______
> FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
> Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
> Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
> http://www.figleaf.com
> http://training.figleaf.com
>
--
John Grden
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
|
|
| hank williams 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| On 7/12/06, Jay Charles <jay-/2BbR9jOFtJDNXj9fXT1TFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Hank... let's not put words in my mouth... shall we?
>
> In both the onlist discussion and our offlist discussion I voiced my
> concern that there may be patent and/or copyright issues at play, but I
> never said that the folks behind Red5 *MUST* have infringed on them in
> order to develop it. By changing MAY to MUST, you have turned my
> suspicion into an accusation, and that's not what I had in mind.
Quote from prior conversation:
<snip>
As for patents, Macromedia held several on processes that are part FMS, and
unless my understanding of things is very skewed, the same processes are
employed by Red5. Perhaps my wording could have been better=85 my concern i=
s
that the use of these processes, along with the use of RTMP makes for a
shaky situation in terms of legality.
</snip>
Let your words speak for themselves. If I have paraphased insufficiently,
forgive me. But as far as I can see you clearly indicated you believed that
Red5 used "these (patented) processes". I dont think that such a belief
makes you someone that has something personal against Red5 or the team.
However if these are your beliefs and you should be willing to stand by
them... or admit error.
Regards
Hank
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| Phillip Kerman 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| I can appreciate the concern a developer might have given the choice between
open source (red5) or a commercial product (FMS). The thing is, going the
commercial route is not some sort of guarantee of a bug free product with
lifelong support. I have yet been able to tell a client "oh, that's a bug
in the X company software that I'm using"... and then have them say "okay,
don't bother working it out".
On the one hand, I'm glad to spend (the client's money) buying a product
like FMS if I think it can offer something over another product. I supposed
this is money taken from the project budget that may not exist. In fact,
I'd probably rather do the commercial product because it does provide a tiny
bit of protection. But it's really tiny.
Maybe this story is a distraction, but I habr an app I built in Flash MX for
FCS 1.0. "Upgrading" the files over the last few generations of Flash and
FMS has been anything but smooth. The thing is that it wasn't as if I did
these upgrades in order to benefit from a newly added feature. There must be
a rule that all support classes have to be rewritten with every update.
What a hassle! Having said this, I doubt it would be any different with
open source. I'm just saying, the commercial product really doesn't buy you
anything except the product at hand. You have to look at what the product
offers on the surface--not some implied level of support because, if there
is any, it's not all that much.
Thanks,
Phillip
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| Jay Charles 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| If it will end this public pissing match, Hank, I concede to your vastly
superior knowledge of the law, patents and copyrights, and the ways of
world in general.
I feel compelled to mention that it is in tremendously bad form to post
the contents of a private communication in a public venue, particularly
when done with the sole intent of attacking or discrediting someone, and
even more particularly when the purpose of the venue is support and
information (as opposed to controversy and debate). That's not to say
that I have any specific problem with what you posted (it's merely a
reiteration of what I posted earlier), nor does it mean that I'm not
willing to stand behind my ideas and thoughts. It's just not the right
thing to do.
If you want to continue this with me, please do it off list.
@Jim Ball - Since this became more of an argument than a discussion, I'm
stepping out of this topic (this thread of it anyway) as I don't think
continuing with the current tone is going to help anyone. For that
reason, I won't be forwarding any emails about it.
-Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of hank
williams
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:55 AM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] Are there any FMS/RTMP Patents?
On 7/12/06, Jay Charles <jay-/2BbR9jOFtJDNXj9fXT1TFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> Hank... let's not put words in my mouth... shall we?
>
> In both the onlist discussion and our offlist discussion I voiced my
> concern that there may be patent and/or copyright issues at play, but
I
> never said that the folks behind Red5 *MUST* have infringed on them in
> order to develop it. By changing MAY to MUST, you have turned my
> suspicion into an accusation, and that's not what I had in mind.
Quote from prior conversation:
<snip>
As for patents, Macromedia held several on processes that are part FMS,
and
unless my understanding of things is very skewed, the same processes are
employed by Red5. Perhaps my wording could have been better. my concern
is
that the use of these processes, along with the use of RTMP makes for a
shaky situation in terms of legality.
</snip>
Let your words speak for themselves. If I have paraphased
insufficiently,
forgive me. But as far as I can see you clearly indicated you believed
that
Red5 used "these (patented) processes". I dont think that such a belief
makes you someone that has something personal against Red5 or the team.
However if these are your beliefs and you should be willing to stand by
them... or admit error.
Regards
Hank
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
| |
| Chris Allen 2006-07-12, 1:11 pm |
| Did anyone notice that Jay Charles is only one letter off from Ray
Charles, and that he's arguing with Hank Williams? Is this a
coincidence? :-D
Anyway, I appreciate the discussion. Red5 has done nothing illegal and
you can compare it to other projects that have had no legal problems
when reverse engineering a protocol for interoperability sake. Samba
is just one example. http://us5.samba.org/samba/
-Chris
On 7/12/06, Jay Charles <jay-/2BbR9jOFtJDNXj9fXT1TFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> If it will end this public pissing match, Hank, I concede to your vastly
> superior knowledge of the law, patents and copyrights, and the ways of
> world in general.
>
________________________________________
_______
FlashComm-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training
http://www.figleaf.com
http://training.figleaf.com
|
|
|
|
|