Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 1st May 2010 22:17 UTC
Legal We've all heard how the h.264 is rolled over on patents and royalties. Even with these facts, I kept supporting the best-performing "delivery" codec in the market, which is h.264. "Let the best win", I kept thinking. But it wasn't until very recently when I was made aware that the problem is way deeper. No, my friends. It's not just a matter of just "picking Theora" to export a video to Youtube and be clear of any litigation. MPEG-LA's trick runs way deeper! The [street-smart] people at MPEG-LA have made sure that from the moment we use a camera or camcorder to shoot an mpeg2 (e.g. HDV cams) or h.264 video (e.g. digicams, HD dSLRs, AVCHD cams), we owe them royalties, even if the final video distributed was not encoded using their codecs! Let me show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

UPDATE: Engadget just wrote a reply to this article. The article says that you don't need an extra license to shoot commercial video with h.264 cameras, but I wonder why the license says otherwise, and Engadget's "quotes" of user/filmmaker indemnification by MPEG-LA are anonymous...

UPDATE 2: Engadget's editor replied to me. So according to him, the quotes are not anonymous, but organization-wide on purpose. If that's the case, I guess this concludes that. And I can take them on their word from now on.

UPDATE 3: And regarding royalties (as opposed to just licensing), one more reply by Engadget's editor.

Permalink for comment 422171
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
WHOA! Hold on there...
by tupp on Sun 2nd May 2010 07:26 UTC
tupp
Member since:
2006-11-12

Thankfully, there are still some MJPEG HD cameras in the market, although they are getting fewer and fewer: Nikon's dSLRs, and the previous generation of Panasonic's HD digicams. Other cameras that might be more acceptable to use codec-wise are the Panasonic HVX-200 (DVCPro HD codec, $6000), the SILICON IMAGING SI-2K (using the intermediate format Cineform to record, costs $12,000), and the RED One (using the R3D intermediate format, costs $16,000+). Every other HD camera in the market is unsuitable, if you want to be in the clear 100%...

There might be a couple of other cameras which are "in the clear":

www.ikonoskop.com/dii/

www.sumix.com/products/cameras/smx-12a2c.html

http://www.kinor.ru/en/products/camera/dc2k/

http://cinema.elphel.com/elphelcamera

www.panavision.com/product_detail.php?maincat=1&cat=36&id=375&node=c0, c136,c137

www.visionresearch.com/index.cfm?sector=htm/files&page=camera_HD_new

www.weisscam.com/products/hs-1/features.html

www.arridigital.com/technical

www.grassvalley.com/products/ldk_8000_elite

www.visionresearch.com/index.cfm?sector=htm/files&page=Phantom_Flex

www.sbfinalcut.org/community/index.php?option=com_content&view=article &id=68:sony-f35&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=50

Furthermore, some of these manufacturers have more than one HD camera.

Reply Score: 3