One of the most interesting things to me is that JPEG-XL is under an open Patent License, unlike the original JPEG. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL https

One of the most interesting things to me is that JPEG-XL is under an open Patent License, unlike the original JPEG. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL Also, Google contributed quite a bit to it's development. As the patent grants show: https://github.com/ImageMagick/jpeg-xl/blob/main/PATENTS https://github.com/ImageMagick/jpeg-xl/blob/main/PATENTS https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/blob/main/PATENTS https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/blob/main/PATENTS Microsoft seemed to have gotten a patent on part of it's implementation (which Google also tried to get). Not sure if Google will pay to invalidate that patent, but I have a feeling they are more likely to defend AVIF. https://www.theregister.com/2022/02/17/microsoft_ans_patent/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/02/17/microsoft_ans_patent/ Google's control is a little concerning, but I do feel there are bigger fish to fry then choosing between two free formats. A bigger concern is the H.264 and H.265 patents domination of video.