Wild Fox: Firefox Fork with H.264 Support
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th May 2010 12:52 UTC, submitted by mrsteveman1
Internet & Networking Mozilla, sticking to its ideals of the open web, decided long ago that support for the patent-encumbered H264 codec would not be included in any of its products. Not only is H264 wholly incompatible with the open web and Free software, it is also incredibly expensive. Mozilla could use one of the open source implementations, but those are not licensed, and the MPEG-LA has been quite clear in that it will sue those who encode or decode H264 content without a license. Software patents, however, are only valid in some parts of the world, so an enterprising developer has started a project that was sure to come eventually: Firefox builds with H264 support.
E-mail Print r 2   · Read More · 49 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/hzb
Permalink for comment 425003
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: ...
by smitty on Sun 16th May 2010 22:08 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: ..."
smitty
Member since:
2005-10-13

That's a claim I've read often, but the actual MPEG-LA website says otherwise.

Source? They've made it clear that anyone using an unlicensed implementation is breaking the law, and that they reserve the right to sue in that case.

In fact, the MPEG-LA does not even have a licensing program for users.

But that doesn't matter. They have no obligation to provide you the means to license it, and can still sue anyone who uses it without a license.

Giving a free ride for anyone who distributes 99,999 copies per year, but suing individual users who don't have a license, because they can't even obtain one? That does not make sense.

Probably not, but look at the MPAA and RIAA. They went after individual users to try to create a public example to deter others. Sometimes it's easier to go after the little users than the larger groups distributing, which can always just move their servers somewhere else.

Such a case won't even be accepted by courts.

Now that's just silly, of course it would. You're trying to look at this using common sense, but that's something that has no place in a court of law.

Reply Parent Score: 2