| |||||||||||||
FFmpeg vs. MPEG-LA royaltiesFFmpeg vs. MPEG-LA royaltiesPosted Jan 28, 2010 8:15 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281)In reply to: FFmpeg vs. MPEG-LA royalties by DonDiego Parent article: Blizzard: HTML5 video and H.264 - what history tells us and why we're standing with the web
> > What if the corporations that run the MPEG-LA just decide they don't
> > like us? You'd have us bet everything on the long-term goodwill of > > the MPEG-LA. That would be extremely foolish.
> They sue you and get no money out of you. Then you have to stop US
Mozilla made $78 million in revenue in fiscal 2008. That's not "no money." They don't want to encourage users to adopt a patented codec that will end up costing them. Can you really blame them?
Anyway, IE still has a huge honking market share and probably won't implement any kind of HTML5 video. I wonder if someone will write a plugin to do it. I'm not familiar with how the plugin architecture works so I don't even know if such a plugin would be feasible.
> I can imagine hilarious scenarios of course: airport controls for software
I can imagine some kind of futuristic tablet computing device where installing unauthorized software was impossible. All software would have to be approved by some centralized authority, who would be an easy target for patent litigation. In that case, distributing free software that used patented codecs could easily become impossible.
Of course, that could never happen. Pure science fiction :)
(Log in to post comments)
FFmpeg vs. MPEG-LA royalties Posted Jan 28, 2010 10:52 UTC (Thu) by DonDiego (subscriber, #24141) [Link]
> I can imagine hilarious scenarios of course: airport controls for software
> patent contraband :-)
> I can imagine some kind of futuristic tablet computing device where
Apple ships an H.264 decoder with that device already, patent license and all. So no problem from that side...
|
|||||||||||||