Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th May 2010 16:34 UTC
Legal CNet investigates whether H264's licensing is really a legal minefield. John Gruber, proponent of H264, concludes from the article, which uses the MPEG-LA and several legal experts as sources, that no, it is not a legal minefield. He's probably been reading a different article than I did, though, because even the legal experts have trouble understanding the licensing structure. Heck, even the MPEG-LA's head of licensing's language is remarkably unclear and broad. So, is it a legal minefield? Most certainly - this article does nothing to quell the worries.
Thread beginning with comment 422746
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: this article...
by kaiwai on Wed 5th May 2010 02:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: this article..."
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Right, because Android totally hasn't taken off yet, and HTC is totally not one of the major phone makers.


I second that; if it was a matter of upholding patents then why did it take until now for Apple to do something? It is something I always question when the issue of patents come up and why apparently 'upholders of intellectual property' wait until an organisation makes a success of something before doing anything about it. What it seems to be is selective outrange when their dominance is challenged by a boisterous upstart.

Reply Parent Score: 2