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 555051
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Wrong link?
by JAlexoid on Mon 11th Mar 2013 02:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Wrong link?"
JAlexoid
Member since:
2009-05-19

You pay an H264 license under limited circumstances as a content distributor for the convenience of having ubiquitous video distribution. H264 is in everything.


You have it the other way around. The circumstances under which you don't pay are limited. The circumstances under which you have to pay are only limited by applicable patent laws.(But then, you could say that you have to pay for any patent under limited circumstances)

Reply Parent Score: 3