Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 10th Mar 2013 13:07 UTC
Permalink for comment 554979
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 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2011-10-12
What does matter is VP8 proponents claiming that VP8 is magically safer. No one is claiming that H264 is completely absolved from any and all patent risk, precisely because such a claim is absurd.
This has never been about saying that H264 is safer, but that VP8 is not safer.
Here's a list of the H.264 licencors, just look at how long that list is and the names on it. http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensors.aspx
On the other hand, you have Google, the biggest advertiser on the planet (their major(only?) source of profit) with VP8.
What a dilemma.
Edited 2013-03-10 16:12 UTC