| |||||||||||||
Swift and predictable reactions to WebMSwift and predictable reactions to WebMPosted May 25, 2010 21:47 UTC (Tue) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953)In reply to: Swift and predictable reactions to WebM by drag Parent article: Swift and predictable reactions to WebM
ON2 Made a big deal about their codec's being "patent free" in that they had done the patent research and made sure their codec's didn't infringe any known patent they didn't own. This was long before the Google purchase. Their whole business model was "we can sell you this codec for far cheaper than the MPEG-LA license and we guarantee it doesn't infringe the MPEG-LA patent pool".
Personally I think MPEG-LA will keep blowing smoke and paying for Astroturf studies, but in the end they will never sue because they don't want to risk the patents in the pool being invalidated or providing court evidence that VP8 doesn't infringe MPEG-LA patents. If they sue and Google wins, bam the whole world shifts to VP8 and the MPEG-LA patent pool becomes worthless.
No, they won't sue, it's far to big a risk. It's far easier to spread FUD.
(Log in to post comments)
Swift and predictable reactions to WebM Posted May 25, 2010 23:02 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Yes. And because we know this then...
The burden of proof is on mpeg-la's shoulders. If the best they can come with is fud, then that effectely means they are admitting that vp8 doesn't violate any of their patents, or Google has a patent they violate. Either way they would be toothless.
On2 vs. the MPEG LA Posted May 29, 2010 9:35 UTC (Sat) by DonDiego (subscriber, #24141) [Link]
> On2 Made a big deal about their codec's being "patent free" in that they
> had done the patent research and made sure their codec's didn't infringe > any known patent they didn't own.
This is a hearsay rumor that gets repeated all the time, but I see no basis for it in reality. Please present us with a quote that shows On2 claiming VP8 does not infringe any MPEG LA patents.
If you look at the list of licensees in good standing for the AVC/H.264 patent pool of the MPEG LA
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx
you will find On2 (and Google) there. There was absolutely no need for On2 to avoid any patents from that pool, they paid for using them. On the contrary, if any of the described techniques would help them reach their goal of improving their own codecs quicker, it made good business sense to use them...
On2 vs. the MPEG LA Posted May 29, 2010 10:13 UTC (Sat) by roc (subscriber, #30627) [Link]
Licensing the AVC pool only gives you the right to use those patents in an implementation of H.264. It does not give you the right to use those patents in an implementation of VP8. So On2 being an AVC licensee is completely irrelevant here.
|
|||||||||||||