5 ms·

AV1 is open source and patent free, and the AOMedia group also has Mozilla and Xiph as founding members along with those three. If this antitrust investigation

AV1 is open source and patent free, and the AOMedia group also has Mozilla and Xiph as founding members along with those three. If this antitrust investigation actually exists, the EU can properly get bent, and should stop shilling for the MPEG patent pool.

calvinmorrison 4y ago
easy to make the case that Mozilla is a shell company for Google.
- admax88qqq 4y ago
  It's really not
- IntelMiner 4y ago
  Only if the tinfoil is cutting off your blood supply
- DiabloD3 4y ago
  Although I understand your sentiment, Mozilla was blackmailed by Google (using their yearly donation to keep Google Search the default); they were forced to either give up $300m/yr or kill Rust and cripple Firefox development. Mitchell Baker, the current CEO and the CEO during this whole thing, makes $3m/yr, yet Firefox userbase keeps shrinking due to management throwing the engineering team under the bus. I think it is safe to say that, although Mozilla isn't a shell company for Google, Mitchell Baker might be a shell CEO on Google's payroll.
brigade 4y ago
It's royalty free, not patent free. If AOMedia had no applicable patents, the patent license under issue wouldn't exist.
nwah1 4y ago
Fraunhofer is based in Germany and likely is pushing this.
- MallocVoidstar 4y ago
  It may also be Sisvel, based in Luxembourg and has been trying to use patents against AV1.
Someone 4y ago
Whether AV1 is patent free isn’t clear cut, it seems: FTA: “…AOM and its members may be imposing licensing terms (mandatory royalty-free cross licensing) on innovators that were not a part of AOM at the time of the creation of the AV1 technical, but whose patents are deemed essential to (its) technical specifications," the paper said.”
- DiabloD3 4y ago
  Standard anti-patent language to neuter the patents against AV1 users and implementors. Until patent reform occurs, it's the best we got, and the closest we can get to keeping FOSS patent-free. This is no different than the GPLv3 anti-patent language, imo.

calvinmorrison 4y ago

easy to make the case that Mozilla is a shell company for Google.

admax88qqq 4y ago
It's really not
IntelMiner 4y ago
Only if the tinfoil is cutting off your blood supply
DiabloD3 4y ago
Although I understand your sentiment, Mozilla was blackmailed by Google (using their yearly donation to keep Google Search the default); they were forced to either give up $300m/yr or kill Rust and cripple Firefox development. Mitchell Baker, the current CEO and the CEO during this whole thing, makes $3m/yr, yet Firefox userbase keeps shrinking due to management throwing the engineering team under the bus. I think it is safe to say that, although Mozilla isn't a shell company for Google, Mitchell Baker might be a shell CEO on Google's payroll.

brigade 4y ago

It's royalty free, not patent free. If AOMedia had no applicable patents, the patent license under issue wouldn't exist.

nwah1 4y ago

Fraunhofer is based in Germany and likely is pushing this.

MallocVoidstar 4y ago
It may also be Sisvel, based in Luxembourg and has been trying to use patents against AV1.

Someone 4y ago

Whether AV1 is patent free isn’t clear cut, it seems: FTA: “…AOM and its members may be imposing licensing terms (mandatory royalty-free cross licensing) on innovators that were not a part of AOM at the time of the creation of the AV1 technical, but whose patents are deemed essential to (its) technical specifications," the paper said.”

DiabloD3 4y ago
Standard anti-patent language to neuter the patents against AV1 users and implementors. Until patent reform occurs, it's the best we got, and the closest we can get to keeping FOSS patent-free. This is no different than the GPLv3 anti-patent language, imo.