I'm sure this will be controversial, but Mozilla *is* able to pay per-copy codec royalties;
after all, they have tens of millions of dollars per year in revenue. They choose not to use
technically superior industry-standard codecs to encourage royalty-free standards.
Posted Aug 15, 2008 1:21 UTC (Fri) by dmag (subscriber, #17775)
[Link]
Hmm, I have two problems with that statement.
First, it's not clear that Mozilla has enough money pull this off.
Someone should calculate the $/download that they have today. (or is it
downloads per dollar?) And there's the little question of what happens
if they run low on funds: Stop distributing mozilla or rip out the video?
Second, you assume those funds wouldn't do anything useful otherwise. I'd
rather they fund people to hack on mozilla and/or find a replacement for
proprietary formats.