Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 10th Mar 2013 13:07 UTC
Multimedia, AV A few days ago, Google and the MPEG-LA announced that they had come to an agreement under which Google received a license for techniques in VP8 that may infringe upon MPEG-LA patents (note the 'if any'). Only a few days later, we learn the real reason behind Google and the MPEG-LA striking a deal, thanks to The H Open, making it clear that the MPEG-LA has lost. Big time. Update: Chris Montgomery: "The wording suggests Google paid some money to grease this along, and the agreement wording is interesting [and instructive] but make no mistake: Google won. Full stop."
Permalink for comment 554952
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wrong link?
by Alfman on Sun 10th Mar 2013 14:45 UTC
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Your quote from h-online.com shows this link:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg06520.html

But this is in fact a discussion of video quality and efficiency: "Video codec quality evaluations (Re: Agenda time request for draft-dbenham-webrtcvideomti)"

The other links show what we already knew last time, so I'm a bit perplexed about this statement: "Only a few days later, we learn the real reason behind Google and the MPEG-LA striking a deal, thanks to The H Open, making it clear that the MPEG-LA has lost. Big time."

If the links are correct, can you elaborate on the logic for your conclusion? I don't understand how a discussion on codec quality fits into patent negotiation or how MPEG-LA's bluffed? Thanks for clarifying.

Edited 2013-03-10 14:47 UTC

Reply Score: 2