Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 20 May 2010.
Firefox is back again!
Just we need! Good work G!
The patent pool held by the MPEG-LA is so far-reaching that some of it's members to claim no-one can make a commercial video codec anymore without violating some of their IP. That would seem to indicate the purpose of the MPEG-LA pool is not only to protect H.264 and it's licensing terms, but also to form a global monopoly on *all* video encoding.
On the other hand, this could very well be ill-informed FUD with no legal basis, tested or otherwise, as they haven't mentioned which patents they're talking about. On2 also had it's own patent pool covering it's VP codecs, and (considering how old video encoding is) it's likely there is considerable prior art, throwing additional doubt on how valid the more fundamental patents in this argument actually are.
I also read that, thanks to the licensing terms of the MPEG-LA, you don't just owe royalties on video in it's final distribution format. If any MPEG-LA controlled format was used for recording or as an intermediary, you also owe them royalties for that as soon as you publish, no matter what format you used.
how does this fit with hardware support? obviously there are a lot of phones/mobile devices with hardware for specific codecs. Will they be able to also work with webM?
Excellent news. One more thing we needed for an open web.
This had to happen sometime!
but how is the overhead? is it less then H.264? so that even net books wont have issues with playback? will there be GPU processing support for it? I mean I would like to know more then just that its open source.
Google annoys me sometimes with their manner of forcing a "standard" onto people by opensourcing it.
Low, yes, yes and yes.
nobody is being forced to use it. but when you have a choice between an open-source product, and one that will bend you over in the near future, which would you rather have?
exactly, if there is a good standard and its free, then it looks like a win win for the consumer.
I don't see where anybody is being forced to do anything. Anyway this is good news and at least with google behind the codec there is enough legal muscle to protect it from patent troll lawsuits in the future.
really? then ya Im all for it.
MPEG-LA just announced it's assembling a patent pool for use against VP8. Didn't take them very long. I seem to recall mentioning this happening in my recent interviews with The Register and such on Wild Fox.
I guess it just underlines as you state that these patents are so far-reaching that there can be no 'free' codec, and that it's only a matter of time before Theora gets whacked upside down as well.
Whilst there might be dubious patents that could affect WebM the question becomes do the patent trolls have the funds to go against google? I doubt it, look at what they did to blue destiny records
the answer is obvious. tactical nuke patent trolls.
Whether they're forcing people into it or not, having a widely adobted open source standard is a good thing. By being open source, any problems or potential optimisations will more than likely quickly be spotted and dealt with. The fact that Google's behind it doesn't generate them any extra revenue, only good publicity.
this is just FUD by the MPEG-LA. Google paid 125m to get VP8. Does anyone really think they didn't do their homework beforehand? The MPEG-LA have just come proved they are full of ****.
Separate names with a comma.