>For High-Throughput JPEG 2000 (that is the official name), we have a desire to make this a royalty free standard. For JPEG XS, there is no such desire. The market - professional broadcasting applications - does not have problems with licensing, so it seems very likely that this standard includes IPs. The license costs in broadcasting are minor compared to the hardware costs and the savings you get from a mezzanine codec.
Okay everybody, JPEG XS is just software for magic boxes. Nothing to see here, implementing it is pointless.
Actually wait. Argh. What are the patented bits of the encoding process? Now FOSS has to go add those to the "but we can't come up with this" list. Grr.
The post that BurningCycles quotes is hardly strong evidence that JPEG-XS is (intentionally) covered by any patents. There is just some random speculation based on "lack of desire to make royalty-free standard", and I'd point out that this comes from someone who is apparently developing a at least somewhat competing standard.
While it is not unreasonable to think that there are patents involved, I would want to hear something bit more definite before making any conclusions or assumptions.
>For High-Throughput JPEG 2000 (that is the official name), we have a desire to make this a royalty free standard. For JPEG XS, there is no such desire. The market - professional broadcasting applications - does not have problems with licensing, so it seems very likely that this standard includes IPs. The license costs in broadcasting are minor compared to the hardware costs and the savings you get from a mezzanine codec.