Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th May 2012 18:16 UTC
Permalink for comment 517281
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:39 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 11:32 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 19:39 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 11:43 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2011-05-19
Indeed, in these cases, the OEM was paying the DVD licenses *twice*. First through Microsoft, and then through the third-party DVD playback software.
Reading between the lines of the Microsoft blog post, it looks like they proposed several alternative licensing models to the DVD patent pool -- and gotten turned down. They can't pay the license only when Windows is installed on machines with a DVD drive. They can't pay the license only when a DVD is played back for the first time. They can't pay the license only when other DVD playback software isn't installed.
The only way to avoid paying the license is to strip out the functionality entirely. Which they did.