DV Dongle AMBE Codec: Potential

[SCPD]

I have second-hand knowledge of a handful of people successfully implementing IMBE using the TIA document as a reference. Once such implementation was written in QBASIC about 4 or 5 years ago (obviously not real time).

Strictly speaking - if your coding to a published spec - it's not "reverse" engineering.

This has implications for ProVoice, but that's another story.

 

[kb1ipd]

Assuming that any decoder for IMBE was opensource and not sold directly for profit, then it would be difficult for DVSI to claim patent infringement - or at least more difficult - given that it could not be considered an infringement of exclusivity of enterprise. It certainly would not be the first time that a codec or format has been implemented independently. Considering the documentation is out there to do so it seems like it's something that probably would be doable...

Is there any chance that this is stuff is still floating around? If it's in Q-basic, but it actually works and can be used, then I'll gladly translate it into C or some other more up to date programing language.

 

[N_Jay]

There are probably both patents AND copyrights on different aspects of the code.
Being as Vocoder intellectual property is all DVSI has, I would bet that it is well protected.

When you protect an idea, you usually also build protection around it, such as patenting the ways that almost work, etc.

 

[davidbond21]

Patent-protection-concern-trolling aside, patents are published information accessible to the public. And the protection extended to you, the assignee, is really only as good as your lawyer is knowledgeable in the area of your patent. A broadly written or described invention is asking to walked all over and challenged and conversely, a narrowly detailed product will attract similar patents that are nuanced enough to not be considered infringement.

 

[N_Jay]

A broadly written or described invention is asking to walked all over and challenged and conversely, a narrowly detailed product will attract similar patents that are nuanced enough to not be considered infringement.

That is why you write lots of narrow patents surrounding the patented idea.

 

[davidbond21]

That is why you write lots of narrow patents surrounding the patented idea.

Or...you could just expand your claims, or broaden their scope a little. Writing more patents is extremely time consuming, not to mention expensive.

 

[N_Jay]

Or...you could just expand your claims, or broaden their scope a little. Writing more patents is extremely time consuming, not to mention expensive.

Yes, and when your entire business is based upon protecting you IPR, it is a prudent use of time and money.

 

[kb1ipd]

There are probably both patents AND copyrights on different aspects of the code.
Being as Vocoder intellectual property is all DVSI has, I would bet that it is well protected.

When you protect an idea, you usually also build protection around it, such as patenting the ways that almost work, etc.

The fact that a format is copyrighted does not mean it will not be decoded by third party software, often open source. This is hard to stop or fight, because once it's out of the bag it's out. It's a legal issue that it is difficult to make a good case for something that is freely distributed because it does not compete on a commercial level.

If it is only a method for decoding and not sold as a final product, or it is not sold at all, then it's more difficult to make a case.

I'm not going to advocate doing anything unethical or trampling the rights of DVSI. However, there are free, open-source decoders, editors and writers for: MP3, PDF, Adobe Flash, Mpeg-4 AVC, *.DOC, Sorenson 3, Real Audio, PSD/Photoshop and plenty of others.

The fact that something is proprietary has never ever stopped people from making software to decode or read it. The De Facto format for 3D CAD drawing exchange is .DWG despite the fact that Autodesk still insists that it owns the format and doesn't authorize it's general use, every damn program will import or export it.

I'd gladly support any IMBE decoder and we'll just see if it leads to a cease and desist letter.

 

[N_Jay]

The fact that a format is copyrighted does not mean it will not be decoded by third party software, often open source. This is hard to stop or fight, because once it's out of the bag it's out. It's a legal issue that it is difficult to make a good case for something that is freely distributed because it does not compete on a commercial level.

If it is only a method for decoding and not sold as a final product, or it is not sold at all, then it's more difficult to make a case.

I'm not going to advocate doing anything unethical or trampling the rights of DVSI. However, there are free, open-source decoders, editors and writers for: MP3, PDF, Adobe Flash, Mpeg-4 AVC, *.DOC, Sorenson 3, Real Audio, PSD/Photoshop and plenty of others.

The fact that something is proprietary has never ever stopped people from making software to decode or read it. The De Facto format for 3D CAD drawing exchange is .DWG despite the fact that Autodesk still insists that it owns the format and doesn't authorize it's general use, every damn program will import or export it.

I'd gladly support any IMBE decoder and we'll just see if it leads to a cease and desist letter.

OK, So lets get the facts strait.

From what we have learned in this thread.

1) All the details needed to decode IMBE are in the public domain between the patents and the standards documents.
2) Software based decoders have been built from the above sources.
3) Once a software version is out there it is hard to protect.

And add to that;
4) This forum probably has the greatest concentration of people with the interest and skill to do that above.
5) No one here seems to have finished this "simple" task.

Hmmmmm???:roll:

 

[davidbond21]

OK, So lets get the facts strait.

From what we have learned in this thread.

1) All the details needed to decode IMBE are in the public domain between the patents and the standards documents.
2) Software based decoders have been built from the above sources.
3) Once a software version is out there it is hard to protect.

And add to that;
4) This forum probably has the greatest concentration of people with the interest and skill to do that above.
5) No one here seems to have finished this "simple" task.

Hmmmmm???:roll:

Except that something under patent protection is still illegal for you to produce in the privacy of your own home for non-profit purposes that you don't tell anyone about(not that you have to be told that). And if they were to reveal themselves on here, for the amount of patent/copyright concern trolling you invest yourself in, I'd imagine people may get the impression that you'd be the first one to turn them in.

Although you are correct in saying that once the knowledge is out there, it is hard to suppress.

 

[N_Jay]

Except that something under patent protection is still illegal for you to produce in the privacy of your own home for non-profit purposes that you don't tell anyone about(not that you have to be told that).

Except that most academic uses are allowed, so there is little real risk to putting it out there as long as it is not sold, or distributed.

And with all the other discussions here, I am q2uite sure we would know if anyone had done it.

I stand by my conclusion.

 

[AZScanner]

And with all the other discussions here, I am q2uite sure we would know if anyone had done it.

I stand by my conclusion.

Remember what happened to Bill Cheek? If not, google it. That's what happens when you thumb your nose at "the man" and "do it anyway". He broke NO laws whatsoever and the decoders he sold were simple data slicers; the software he distributed with them was readily available online for free, but that didn't stop him from being raided by the secret service, charged with numerous federal crimes and subsequently shut down & bankrupted anyway.

I can GUARANTEE you that there's hobbyist written software that decodes P25. I also guarantee you that no one here is dumb enough to release it to the public without legal authorization from DVSI, much less for free. Google all you want, you won't find it - but it exists nonetheless.

You can choose to believe that or not. Up to you.

-AZ

 

[davidbond21]

N_Jay

Aside from arguing some semantics, I agree with your larger conclusion that if it was so simple, somebody would have already done it.

Though AZScanner makes a good point with the Bill Cheek example(and an example is what he was made into by the gov't). The people capable of writing this code would probably have the foresight to not indiscriminately bandy that knowledge about. Though its not a matter of believing it exists or not.

 

[jcardani]

This is an old thread but does anyone know if Eric was successful with decoding IMBE with the DV dongle using his method?

 

[ElroyJetson]

It may interest you to know that Icom has a product called the RC-FS10 Remote Communicator, which is a software package with a digital voice dongle. It is intended for use with Icom IDAS systems. The voice codec is AMBE-2. I can't say with any certainty if this product could be repurposed, by a creative
and smart person, for use with systems other than IDAS.


Elroy