I have to agree with this criticism of the article. It presents misleading or incorrect summaries of the primary sources. While the article serves a useful function in providing links to them, it does a disservice in summarizing them badly before moving on to a "follow the money" argument rather than a technical overview.
It would have been more useful, for example, to approach the issue of patent avoidance from a different angle. Jason's analysis points out several things notably missing from VP8, first among them B-frames, that one would expect could be the starting point for further improvements. But if they were deliberately omitted to avoid patent claims, then this avenue of improvement may be closed off. This issue was raised in several of the primary sources linked to in the article, but could have been brought out more clearly in the article itself.
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds