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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
patent 20010017944 | 310 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
patent 20010017944
Authored by: Steve Martin on Wednesday, March 27 2013 @ 06:55 AM EDT

Is Cisco part of the MPEG-LA group that signed a deal with Google on the VP8 codec?

The MPEG-LA list of AVC/H.264 Licensors includes Cisco Systems Canada Co. and Cisco Technology, Inc., but does not include Nokia, the company making all the fuss.

According to this article, we don't know who the 11 companies who entered into the patent deal with Google are. Ironically, the author notes that:

The list of 11 companies is currently not public, and it's not certain at this stage why MPEG LA initially said that 12 companies had relevant patents but only 11 are involved in the agreement.

This is good, albeit belated, news for VP8. It means that the codec's patent situation is at least as clear as that of H.264. In theory, some patent holder could still emerge from the woodwork and start suing, but neither agreements nor patent pools can preclude that option.

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"

[ 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 )