3 ms·
So a standard for interoperability developed with 'patent ceasefires' saying party X won't sue party Y if both share their patent portfolios with one another is
by kregasaurusrex 4y ago
So a standard for interoperability developed with 'patent ceasefires' saying party X won't sue party Y if both share their patent portfolios with one another is considered to be anti-competitive behavior? In the US this is fairly common among tech companies that perfom this sharing under FRAND terms with one another, and saves a lot of headache in avoiding litigation.
The most popular existing codec AVC/H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10 is owned by the MPEGLA group with ~5500 active patents[0] in its portfolio, and the royalty sharing agreements[1] involved are free in small volumes yet become expensive at scale. A multi-tier fee structure for both hardware OEMs (think like the MPEG-2 license fee on the raspberry pi) and video distributors (Netflix et al) exist, where several large tech companies decided to band together in order to create a codec which isn't at the mercy of paying these license fees.
However, Sisvel wants to make their case against AOMedia's goal of a widely distributed free codec and extract up to 32 cents per device[2] based on their pool of a couple hundred patents[3] for both VP9 and AV1 codecs. We'll likely see this go to court and possibly drawn out over a long stretch of time if FRAND terms aren't able to be agreed upon between these parties.
Having a uniform royalty-free standard would be a net win for everyone involved- chip designers can add in an AV1 encoder/decoder without paying a license fee, software companies can freely encode & distribute AV1 videos, and end users have access to free video editing tools that wouldn't need to pay MPEGLA/Sisvel either. The alternative is waiting for the patents to expire and continue rewarding the rent-seeking behavior of NPEs/holding companies created to extract value at every possible step.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Video_Coding#Patent_holders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Video_Coding#Patent_h...
[1] https://www.mpegla.com/wp-content/uploads/avcweb.pdf https://www.mpegla.com/wp-content/uploads/avcweb.pdf Slides 7 & 8
[2] https://www.sisvel.com/licensing-programs/audio-and-video-coding-decoding/video-coding-platform/license-terms/av1-license-terms https://www.sisvel.com/licensing-programs/audio-and-video-co...
[3] https://www.sisvel.com/licensing-programs/audio-and-video-coding-decoding/video-coding-platform/patents https://www.sisvel.com/licensing-programs/audio-and-video-co...
- kasabali 4y agoIf this results is Sisvel's favor, I hope all Youtube stops serving VP9, AV1 or any newer codecs in Europe instead of paying up a single penny to rent seekers. "Hi Europe, enjoy your low-res bitrate starved H264 stream, for eternity." or for 30 years or so, after all HEVC patents expire and all of its rent seekers gave up on it.