2 ms·

I’m all for finding technical solutions for legal problems usually but the issue here is that you cannot keep changing codecs to escape patents because the algo

I’m all for finding technical solutions for legal problems usually but the issue here is that you cannot keep changing codecs to escape patents because the algorithms are etched into the silicon itself. So it’s basically impossible to have a royalty free encoding, unless you’re willing to use encodings that are 20 years old. This is a legal problem that needs a legal solution.

clouddrover 3y ago
The legal solution is exactly what AO Media has done: own the patents that pertain to your video format and license those patents on royalty-free terms. Sisvel's and Avanci's claims are essentially "Haha, you missed some! Sux to be you! Pay us!" And the legal remedies for that are to test those claims in court and win, or to buy Sisvel and Avanci off with a settlement.
- mort96 3y ago
  What if Sysvel and Avanci are (legally) found to be in the right and actually have legitimate patents, and refuse to add their patents to the AOM patent pool? (Why would they agree to that anyway? surely individually licensing AV1 patents would be much more profitable?) Do you think we should just make do with H.264 for another 20 years, or do you think there ought to be a legal solution to the patent mess we're in?
  - clouddrover 3y ago
    > Why would they agree to that anyway? surely individually licensing AV1 patents would be much more profitable? They won't agree to that. They are already not agreeing to that. The two options to keep AV1 royalty-free are their claims are found to be invalid in court or they get bought off via a settlement.