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 555158
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: A basic question
by BallmerKnowsBest on Mon 11th Mar 2013 19:51 UTC in reply to "A basic question"
BallmerKnowsBest
Member since:
2008-06-02

Hope those questions made sense. This issue obviously is quite heated and I am trying to work out the scale of this issue in real world situations.


Yes, they make perfect sense... at least, if we interpret your "questions" as thinly-veiled variations of your standard "Why Apple is so great" sales pitch. Both questions are obvious examples of bragging-by-implication, E.g "how widespread is VP8 use" is a painfully-obvious attempt to brag that H.264 use is more widespread (and in typical fanboy fashion, you're bragging about a detail that has no actual relevance).

Or, for those who have some actual post-secondary education: Tony is using an older-than-dirt debate tactic known as "the Socratic Method" - where you ask questions that are deliberately phrased to lead people to a specific conclusion. It's occasionally used to good effect, but most often it's just used as a weaselly method of disguising statements as questions (though it's not like I expect any better from anyone who would coin a phrase like "Apple-phobe").

Problem is, it doesn't really work when it's so clearly telegraphed.

Reply Parent Score: 3