To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think Nokia likely has a strong stick to beat VP8 with, given their investment in the area. Even more dangerous, they participated in no SDO, so all of their patents are non-standard-essential.
VP8 was a air dropped specification, it wasn't developed in the open, and as such, an argument can be made that it is exposed to significant patent risk (compared to H264) because the amount of known IP holders is up in the air, and there are little to no SEPs covering its implementation.
It is at best less economically viable, and at worst more dangerous to use VP8 because of what I mentioned above, and a lack of a patent pool.
If a significant amount of IP holders come out of the wood works, good luck licensing them individually vs a patent pool.
Edit: Not that I particularly buy the less safe argument, I'm just providing it for discussions sake. I think that both H264 and VP8 have patent uncertainty. Case in point being Microsoft and Motorola duking it out over patents related to H264.
Edited 2013-03-10 18:15 UTC




Member since:
2005-11-10
Almost certainly.
Would said patent possibly be voided if it were brought up in court and scrutinised? Possibly.
So it’s not just a case of the MPEG-LA saying that Theora violates their patents, they know they must also beat a games of chess ahead of time with an opponent whose moves predates their own.
Kroc - 1st May 2010
http://www.osnews.com/thread?421906
I believed then the MPEG-LA were blustering, and that since the VP codecs pre-dated H.264, they had not much to stand on but noise.