5 ms·

Agreed 100%. Mozilla has plenty of money from its Google ad revenue. They should just do the reasonable thing and license h264. It can't be THAT expensive. The

Agreed 100%. Mozilla has plenty of money from its Google ad revenue. They should just do the reasonable thing and license h264. It can't be THAT expensive. The alternative is the continued domination of Flash. Is that what they really want? Because that's what they're choosing to get. I admire their principles but in the end it's the outcome that matters.

windsurfer 17y ago
How do they license it for their derivatives?
- sailormoon 17y ago
  I don't know, but c'mon, they're a $100m/yr foundation. They can find a way. Maybe a plugin or something.
sailormoon 17y ago
And they should support MP3 for HTML5 audio, too!
vegai 17y ago
Would H264 that mean the end of all non-major browsers?
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  And all non-major video platforms, since you pay fees on that side too. You'll note the current drama is around two major video platforms who can easily meet the (capped) costs and probably don't want to encourage people to host their video elsewhere, or even host their own video themselves. There would be no Wordpress equivalent if putting text on the web was taxed.
  - jonknee 17y ago
    > There would be no Wordpress equivalent if putting text on the web was taxed. Ironically, there is VideoPress.
zppx 17y ago
This is stupid, sorry for the strong word, if H.264 succeeds it will be the free market that will lose and not mozilla, any startup that works with videos (say a new video editing on the cloud) will have to pay licensing fees just to serve its users, well, I do not know about people in the USA, but where I live founders generally don't have piles of money to spend in patents, the majority use dedicated servers at rackspace with linux and other open source software because it's cheaper than running your own server with Windows or Mac OS X server. Are you people not considering this as an "outcome"?

windsurfer 17y ago

How do they license it for their derivatives?

sailormoon 17y ago
I don't know, but c'mon, they're a $100m/yr foundation. They can find a way. Maybe a plugin or something.

sailormoon 17y ago

And they should support MP3 for HTML5 audio, too!

vegai 17y ago

Would H264 that mean the end of all non-major browsers?

ZeroGravitas 17y ago
And all non-major video platforms, since you pay fees on that side too. You'll note the current drama is around two major video platforms who can easily meet the (capped) costs and probably don't want to encourage people to host their video elsewhere, or even host their own video themselves. There would be no Wordpress equivalent if putting text on the web was taxed.
- jonknee 17y ago
  > There would be no Wordpress equivalent if putting text on the web was taxed. Ironically, there is VideoPress.

zppx 17y ago

This is stupid, sorry for the strong word, if H.264 succeeds it will be the free market that will lose and not mozilla, any startup that works with videos (say a new video editing on the cloud) will have to pay licensing fees just to serve its users, well, I do not know about people in the USA, but where I live founders generally don't have piles of money to spend in patents, the majority use dedicated servers at rackspace with linux and other open source software because it's cheaper than running your own server with Windows or Mac OS X server. Are you people not considering this as an "outcome"?