3 ms·
So presumably there is an implied threat that if anyone else owns patents that apply to WebM and tries to sue someone over it, one of these companies will be ab
by noahl 15y ago
So presumably there is an implied threat that if anyone else owns patents that apply to WebM and tries to sue someone over it, one of these companies will be able to retaliate?
I imagine that group of companies has enough patents to attack anyone who works in video, but that wouldn't help against a patent troll.
- randall 15y agoThis is more about staring down Apple and MPEGLA, who both have commented that they think WebM is broadly patent encumbered.
- msbarnett 15y agoWouldn't the need for a patent cross-licensing initiative seem to confirm that WebM is broadly patent encumbered?
- kenjackson 15y agoYes. They've basically just formed an MPEG-LA like patent pool with no royalty. This is effectively what MPEG-LA requested, except of course they running the pool. This is a good move on Google's part, although I am still skeptical that during this process they may hit patents that are already in one of the MPEG-LA pools.
- ZeroGravitas 15y agoThat's the beauty of the political process that decides these "technical" decisions. If you give protection then you're admitting there's a problem, if you don't then they can attack you for not being prepared. It's a catch-22 that people are happy to attack you with while claiming they just want the technically superior codec to win.