4 ms·
> "but releasing the source to something doesn't erase any potential patent liability" This line sounds fuzzy for me, then how does MPEG-LA can assert that H.2
by zppx 16y ago
> "but releasing the source to something doesn't erase any potential patent liability"
This line sounds fuzzy for me, then how does MPEG-LA can assert that H.264 is protected against a patent ambush by a third party that is not part of the consortium? Just because the standard is open and there's a large patent pool that belongs to the members of the consortium does not mean that a patent troll can't have a patent that covers some part of the codec.
That said I think that H.264 won the fight. I think however that video codecs, and associated patents, will grow in irrelevance at the same time video becomes more popular.
- danudey 16y agoI think the protection here is in your group of friends. If you get sued for infringing on a patent because you're using Theora, you're pretty much on your own (maybe the EFF will help). If you get sued for infringing on a patent because of h.264, then (among others) Apple, Microsoft, Google, Kodak, Adobe, and dozens of other corporations (with much larger pockets than you) are also on the hook. The last thing they want is a precedent set saying using h.264 is illegal because you couldn't afford a good lawyer. MPEG-LA takes responsibility for the patent infringement, so they get sued instead of you, and then they (with the backing of the other large companies who've contributed and licensed from MPEG-LA) fight the lawsuit, using the best lawyers money can buy. If nothing else, they'll make it so expensive to fight that any would-be patent troll will think very long and very hard about throwing their gloves into that ring.
- zppx 16y agoGood answer, thanks.
- metajack 16y agoYou have big friends with the Xiph codecs. Almost all the big game publishers ship Speex, Vorbis, FLAC, and Theora. Epic, EA, Microsoft, etc. The adoption in that market is ridiculously high. That's a lot of cash on the table for patent trolls to attack, but you don't have to stop there. Google and Mozilla both ship Theora and Vorbis. Vorbis ships in silicon in lots of the non-Apple music devices. Sure, the market of people using MPEG technologies is larger, but the market of people using Xiph codecs is by no means small. Also, MPEG-LA does not indemnify from other patents. This is a common misconception. A patent owner is not going to sue MPEG-LA. They are going to sue Microsoft, Google, Apple, and other people with big bank accounts. Those companies may in turn sue MPEG-LA, but there is no incentive to sue MPEG-LA directly, just as their is no incentive to sue the Xiph.org Foundation directly. EDIT: I didn't mean to say that all of them ship every codec. But all those listed do ship (or have in the recent past) one or more of the Xiph set.
- vetinari 16y agoSigh, once again: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/FAQ.aspx http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/FAQ.aspx Q: Are all AVC essential patents included? A: No assurance is or can be made that the License includes every essential patent. The purpose of the License is to offer a convenient licensing alternative to everyone on the same terms and to include as much essential intellectual property as possible for their convenience. Participation in the License is voluntary on the part of essential patent holders, however. Short version: There is no guarantee there will be no troll. No, they won't fight for you, it is your problem.
- ZeroGravitas 16y agoThis very article claims that AT&T have patent claims on H.264 that aren't covered by MPEG-LA. You have to sort it out seperately.