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 422483
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: This is just HD? Standard Def DV cams are OK?
by Eugenia on Mon 3rd May 2010 22:39
in reply to "This is just HD? Standard Def DV cams are OK?"




Member since:
2010-05-03
I see you listed DVCPro HD as OK; does that also mean that standard definition DV cams are not encumbered? Is another alternative avoiding HD and just sticking with SD and DV?