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 422156
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
What about JPEG then?
by Bringbackanonposting on Sun 2nd May 2010 06:01 UTC
Member since:

CLI, Forgent and now Asure?
Is MJPEG really safe?
I have been out of that loop for a while but from memory Forgent not so long ago was patent trolling the big companies. I wonder if they still have a chance of getting in on the act again?

Reply Score: 1

RE: What about JPEG then?
by jrincayc on Sun 2nd May 2010 15:00 in reply to "What about JPEG then?"
jrincayc Member since:

Are any of those patents still in effect? For example the Forgent patent 4698672 expired in October of 2006.

Reply Parent Score: 1