2 ms·
Simply untrue. Presented in those terms, the 'fact' is: WebM - free license, indemnification against 0 patents. H.264 - paid license, indemnification against
by rbarooah 16y ago
Simply untrue. Presented in those terms, the 'fact' is:
WebM - free license, indemnification against 0 patents.
H.264 - paid license, indemnification against > 1700 patents.
(here's the list: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Documents/avc-att1.pdf http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Documents/avc-att1.p...)
For WebM to be a free equivalent, Google would have to indemnify users against that list of patents. If Google is sure that the patents are not infringed, why doesn't it at least do that?