Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 1st May 2010 22:17 UTC
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 422119
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Who is to say the outcome of the patent war would be the end of software patents? I would not be surprised at all to see the government side heavily with the industry rather than the populace.
The government always sides with industry. However, Patent Armageddon is an opportunity to align the industry with the programmers. If an enormous patent war is started, most companies will lose much more than they will gain from patents. Most of the money will go to the lawyers. And the companies will come crying to the government to end software patents, or even better, all patents.




Member since:
2005-06-29
Who is to say the outcome of the patent war would be the end of software patents? I would not be surprised at all to see the government side heavily with the industry rather than the populace.
Business as usual, so they say.