Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Mar 2013 21:09 UTC
Legal Late last week, Nokia dropped what many consider to be a bomb on the WebM project: a list of patents that VP8 supposedly infringes in the form of an IETF IPR declaration. The list has made the rounds around the web, often reported as proof that VP8 infringes upon Nokia's patents. All this stuff rang a bell. Haven't we been here before? Yup, we have, with another open source codec called Opus. Qualcomm and Huawei made the same claims as Nokia did, but they turned out to be complete bogus. As it turns out, this is standard practice in the dirty business of the patent licensing industry.
Thread beginning with comment 556778
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Big picture...
by ndrw on Wed 27th Mar 2013 00:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Big picture..."
Member since:

VP8 is not inferior in performance to h.264 except for just one factor: encoding speed. In every other respect VP8 can match or exceed h.264 performance.

Encoder also happens to a part of the system that is exposed to patent issues. Luckily, it's also a part that is the most flexible in dealing with them - all known issues can be worked around (at worst encoder will be slower) and, even if you inadvertently trip on a patent, you can still control the damage by simply updating the code.

OTOH, it is really difficult to infringe on patents in a specification of the data format, unless the specification mandates such infringement. Some do, but it does not happen by accident - you have to force conforming implementations to use specific patented techniques.

Reply Parent Score: 2