3 ms·
Would your belief as to the plausibility of a valid claim be different if VP8 were still the closed, proprietary, non-royalty-free product of On2?
by GHFigs 15y ago
Would your belief as to the plausibility of a valid claim be different if VP8 were still the closed, proprietary, non-royalty-free product of On2?
- JoshTriplett 15y agoWould MPEG-LA bother to spread FUD over a random obscure proprietary codec rather than the single biggest threat to their protection racket? If it still belonged to On2, MPEG-LA (or rather, its member companies) would just sue if they actually had anything. Here, the threat of a lawsuit does the job they actually want, but they'll never actually file a lawsuit until they find a defendant they know will settle rather than fighting. Hopefully Google does the same thing Apple did for Lodsys: indemnify to neuter the FUD.
- kierank 15y agorather than the single biggest threat to their protection racket? That's not true at all. VP8 is a web codec for free web streaming and that's free with H.264. MPEG-LA makes their money from volume sales like Blu-Ray Discs or Set-top-Boxes which aren't going to move to VP8 any time soon.