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 422303
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: OSNews
by ephracis on Sun 2nd May 2010 22:54 UTC in reply to "OSNews"
Member since:

I might be wrong here but isn't OSnews LCC based in UK and the UK doesn't have software patents, right? So if you would go with HTML5 and H.264 you would not put OSnews in any risk.

Though, you might put U.S. visitors at risk since they would break their law by watching the videos.

Damn, I am lucky I live in a country where we don't have software patents... yet.

I bet a lot of the big corps will keep making empty patents threats until we have software patents in most of EU. If they start too soon they might scare us into never getting into the mess U.S. is in right now.

Now, who said software patents were a good idea? I don't see the benefit of no one being able to program a video decoder/encoder. That's stupid! Stop treating software as something real. That's what hardware is for. Intellectual Property, my ass. More like Imaginary Property.

Oh, and by the way: congratz, Eugina. Great find, and great journalism!

Edited 2010-05-02 22:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: OSNews
by henderson101 on Sun 2nd May 2010 23:02 in reply to "RE: OSNews"
henderson101 Member since:

I might be wrong here but isn't OSnews LCC based in UK and the UK doesn't have software patents, right?

LLC is US. In the UK we have LTD (Private Limited Company) and PLC (Public Limited Company) that are commonly used.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: OSNews
by ephracis on Mon 3rd May 2010 00:11 in reply to "RE[2]: OSNews"
ephracis Member since:

I see, so OSNews is US-based then. Shame...

Reply Parent Score: 1