Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 21st May 2010 06:49 UTC
Legal Let the spreading of FUD begin! Known patent troll Larry Horn, CEO of MPEG-LA, is clearly feeling the heat - a heat that might set fire to his company's license to print money. After a decade of empty threats towards Theora, the company is apparently putting its it's-impossible-to-create-a-video-codec-that-doesn't-infringe-on-our-stuff attitude into practice once again, by assembling a patent pool to go after VP8. Google, in the meantime, is not impressed.
Thread beginning with comment 425894
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What a Joke
by tf123 on Fri 21st May 2010 12:00 UTC in reply to "What a Joke"
tf123
Member since:
2010-01-28

I found the intro to this post particularly funny:

"Let the spreading of FUD begin!"

Reading the next sentence, I was pretty sure Thom wasn't referring to MPEGLA but was unleashing the open source FUD brigade:

"Known patent troll Larry Horn, CEO of MPEG-LA, is clearly feeling the heat - a heat that might set fire to his company's license to print money."

Even if Thom legitimately believes those claims, does he really need to do so with such incendiary language? Didn't Horn say members of the market are looking for indemnification? Does Thom really think all use of ISO standard mpeg formats is going to disappear because of a free web format? Really? Sure sounds like FUD to me.

Reply Parent Score: -3

RE[2]: What a Joke
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 21st May 2010 12:03 in reply to "RE: What a Joke"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

He is a patent troll. Apart from his job as CEO of the MPEG-LA, he is the CEO of a patent troll company owned by the MPEG-LA. The link is right there. There is nothing "FUD" about that. It's plain old fact.

This thread proves we can have trolls about everything - even the MPEG-LA. I think we might have to shut down OSNews.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: What a Joke
by tf123 on Fri 21st May 2010 13:39 in reply to "RE[2]: What a Joke"
tf123 Member since:
2010-01-28

We can quibble over patent troll, but I will concede it in this matter (I still dont see how using such language is not the language of FUD.) But...

Where is your evidence of "feeling the heat"? (He said people in the market place are asking for indemnification.)

Your evidence that mpeg-la's entire purpose for being and source of revenue will evaporate? (You actually think TV broadcasts, mobile video transmissions (including satellites), DVDs, BluRay disks will all of a sudden jump ship for VP8? Of coure not, this is laughable FUD.)

How is enforcing perfectly legal patents for perfectly legal standards observed the world over by innumerable busineses and industries in innumerable fields a "license to print money" and not a perfectly legitimate business and mode of standardizing video that has been accepted for more than 2 decades? This is the language of FUD.

Edited 2010-05-21 13:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: What a Joke
by Headrush on Fri 21st May 2010 21:06 in reply to "RE[2]: What a Joke"
Headrush Member since:
2006-01-03

I was referencing the fact that every article seems to suggest everything the MPEG-LA says is all FUD.

Whether we like it or not or how stupid we might agree software patents are, the fact is the MPEG-LA does have a wide and varied patent pool. FACT.

Every article mentioning that come 2015 the MPEG-LA could do this or that, yet suggesting VP8 is perfectly safe is just doing the same thing. What stops the MPEG-LA from turning around and deciding to sue ABC for example for using VP8? Everyone assumes that Google would be sued but if using the previous arguments that for H.264 MPEG-LA could sue anyone in the change of use, then if there are violations in VP8, than the same thing can be said for it also.

Which re-enforces my point that as end users we are screwed until this is challenged in court and ultimately decided. The issue is the patent holder can wait for a time frame that fits their agenda. I doubt it exists but the USA patent office really needs a challenge period where new "products/ideas" can be submitted and there as to be some period of discovery that other holders have to decide if they think violations exist. They miss that they are out of look.

IMHO in the current situation we really don't know if we are any better off or not yet.

Reply Parent Score: 2