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 554968
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Wrong link?
by Alfman on Sun 10th Mar 2013 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Wrong link?"
Member since:

Thom Holwerda,

"The only problem: the MPEG-La doesn't have any patents. They've never disclosed any, and neither has anyone else. On2 has always maintained it designed around MPEG-LA's patents, and no one has ever been able to disprove this. In other words, the MPEG-LA bluffed."

I hate to resort to pedantry here, but lack of proof for one side doesn't prove the other. How do you know they bluffed? Me of all people would be happy about it if it were true, but I don't want to start telling people it's true without something substantial to back it up.

"The MPEG-LA gets money for every device, software, service, etc. that ships with H.264 built-in. They get nothing for every VP8 device, software, service, etc. - a significant regression. Had the MPEG-LA's threats had any substance, they would have never agreed to this."

I don't suppose we'll ever find out what the terms were between google and MPEG-LA. It would shed a lot of light on the matter if we knew whether or not there was a lump sum payment.

"So, bluff called, Google won - we all won."

Regardless of what happened behind the curtains, this seems like a very good outcome.

Edited 2013-03-10 15:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2