decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
[rtcweb] VP8 IPR agreement announced. | 120 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
[rtcweb] VP8 IPR agreement announced.
Authored by: dio gratia on Thursday, March 07 2013 @ 11:30 PM EST

Contrast this with the fanboi mime Google admits its VP8/WebM codec infringes MPEG H.264 patents at AppleInsider.

Sort of like a two person race where 'The Soviet Union came in second, while the United States came in next to last', though instead of innuendo, stating FUD as fact ("However, WebM had serious flaws, the largest of which is that it infringed upon H.264 patents itself."). I don't believe a single H.264 patent holder has filed an infringement suit nor has MPEGLA released a list of patents for a patent pool reading on VP8/WebM.

You could wonder who is behind the FUD? See US Justice Department reportedly investigating MPEG LA over VP8 threats (theguardian) or Web Video Rivalry Sparks U.S. Probe (WSJ) from March 4, 2011 where Larry Horn is quoted as unequivocally stating "I can tell you: VP8 is not patent-free," Mr. Horn said. "It's simply nonsense.", which you'd also expect to raise the question of estoppel or result in the purported 11 patent holders feigning ignorance to any examination of VP8/WebM.

The shelf life of this FUD has passed, already.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )