3 ms·
While they are patent-encumbered in the strictest sense of the word, they are not as aggressively licensed as H.266 -- which is what GP was lamenting. Licensing
by cyphar 6y ago
While they are patent-encumbered in the strictest sense of the word, they are not as aggressively licensed as H.266 -- which is what GP was lamenting. Licensing H.266 under the GPL(v3) wouldn't erase the existence of the patents and it would still be "patent-encumbered" in the same sense that VP8/9 and AV1 are.
And retaliation clauses are present in basically every free software license that has clauses dealing with patents (including Apache-2.0).
- p_l 6y agoA big part is in how expensive can you make said retaliation. I'm more and more fond of calling it all a big game of chicken, a MAD without nukes,
- craftinator 6y agoHah I love this analogy! Guess that's societal progress for you; we use currency to replace munitions.
- RBURBURXEIVG3KO 6y agoWouldn't Apache 2 be a better license for this since it is explicit on patents?
- cyphar 6y agoGPL is the example GP used, which is why I referenced it. It's not really important what free software license it would be (though GPLv3 does have an entire section (s11) which is all about patents -- that's why it's compatible with Apache-2.0).