On2 vs. the MPEG LA

Posted May 29, 2010 9:35 UTC (Sat) by DonDiego (guest, #24141)
In reply to: Swift and predictable reactions to WebM by rahvin
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 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.