User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Require revelation!

Require revelation!

Posted May 25, 2013 23:24 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
In reply to: Require revelation! by dlang
Parent article: Google releases a draft VP8 patent cross-license

I read recently that half the patents in the MPEG-LA pool have expired, but you still are buying a license to them when you get a pool license.

I don't even know what that means. How do you buy (or have) a license to an expired patent? Maybe this just means expired patents are included in the list of patents licensed, but that's not even interesting enough to mention. The licensor and licensee must know they're expired, so they don't affect the price or anything else.


(Log in to post comments)

Require revelation!

Posted May 25, 2013 23:55 UTC (Sat) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]

It is, at very least, false advertising...

Require revelation!

Posted May 26, 2013 2:46 UTC (Sun) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

you buy a license to the MPEG-LA pool, it includes a whole bunch of patents, and the money for the patents is split between the owners of the patents.

approximately half of the patents in the pool have expired since it was formed, but the cost to license the pool has not changed, and the list of patents in the pool has not changed

since we don't know how the money is split between the companies in the pool, it's impossible for us to say if these are being counted for that purpose or not.

The article I read was focusing on the fact that the cost of the pool should have dropped as licenses expired, but has not changed


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds