[whatwg] on codecs in a 'video' tag.
gerv at mozilla.org
Mon Apr 2 06:11:19 PDT 2007
Gervase Markham wrote:
> I'll let others comment on this. But I would note that JPEG2000 is
> technically superior to JPEG, but hasn't been widely implemented due to
> patent issues.
Correction: "in part due to patent issues".
> The problem is not that it's $5 million, it's that the amount is unknown
> and unmeasurable. They have no "fixed fee above a certain number of
> units" licensing policy.
My apologies; that's wrong. I assumed the earlier quote on this list was
the sum total of the applicable terms. There is a cap and, as Maciej
says, it's $4.25M per year in 2007-08, and $5M per year in 2009-10.
Such a figure is, of course, entirely out of reach for every single free
software browser project other than Firefox - including the one on which
Safari was based.
> And even if they did, a Mozilla license
> wouldn't cover other members of that community.
This part of my point stands.
More information about the whatwg