[whatwg] Codec mess with <video> and <audio> tags
ian at hixie.ch
Sun Jun 7 12:15:11 PDT 2009
On Sun, 7 Jun 2009, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/6/7 Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar at googlemail.com>:
> > How is it incredible? Who has looked at the submarine patents? They by
> > definition are unpublished! Yes, certainly, published patents are well
> > researched, but this is not the objection that anyone has made to it.
> It is not credible to claim that any other codec whatsoever does not
> have the same problems - and paying Thomson or the MPEG-LA does *not*
> protect one from submarine claims from others, as Microsoft found out to
> its cost with MP3 - nor is it credible to claim that Ogg formats have
> more such problems.
Every codec has the same problem; the difference is that companies like
Apple have already taken on the patent risk with MPEG-LA licensed codecs
and are not willing to double their exposure. (Other companies like Google
apparently _are_ willing to take this risk.)
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg