Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 1st May 2010 22:17 UTC
Legal We've all heard how the h.264 is rolled over on patents and royalties. Even with these facts, I kept supporting the best-performing "delivery" codec in the market, which is h.264. "Let the best win", I kept thinking. But it wasn't until very recently when I was made aware that the problem is way deeper. No, my friends. It's not just a matter of just "picking Theora" to export a video to Youtube and be clear of any litigation. MPEG-LA's trick runs way deeper! The [street-smart] people at MPEG-LA have made sure that from the moment we use a camera or camcorder to shoot an mpeg2 (e.g. HDV cams) or h.264 video (e.g. digicams, HD dSLRs, AVCHD cams), we owe them royalties, even if the final video distributed was not encoded using their codecs! Let me show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

UPDATE: Engadget just wrote a reply to this article. The article says that you don't need an extra license to shoot commercial video with h.264 cameras, but I wonder why the license says otherwise, and Engadget's "quotes" of user/filmmaker indemnification by MPEG-LA are anonymous...

UPDATE 2: Engadget's editor replied to me. So according to him, the quotes are not anonymous, but organization-wide on purpose. If that's the case, I guess this concludes that. And I can take them on their word from now on.

UPDATE 3: And regarding royalties (as opposed to just licensing), one more reply by Engadget's editor.

Thread beginning with comment 422103
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What about the Dirac codec?
by kragil on Sat 1st May 2010 23:37 UTC in reply to "What about the Dirac codec?"
Member since:

Dirac is still very young and has a few issues (hw requirements for example)

And the BBC only checked for european patent laws, I guess. The US laws are very very different (patens on biology (genes) and math (software))

Reply Parent Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:

And the BBC only checked for european patent laws, I guess. The US laws are very very different (patens on biology (genes) and math (software))

I don't see the problem. The rest of the world is, after all, much bigger than the U.S. If everyone else went ahead with Dirac the U.S would be the ones left behind. Of course, being left behind and making themselves irrelevant seems to be what the U.S wants.

Reply Parent Score: 5