Google enters into licensing agreement with MPEG LA


Recommended Posts

When the WebM project was announced back in 2010, one its selling points was that it was open and free of the licensing needs imposed by competitors like H.264. That may have been slightly overstated, however, as Google and MPEG LA have just entered into a licensing agreement covering the video codec at the heart of the format. The codec is known as VP8, and while no financial figures are disclosed the agreement covers various patents from 11 different parties. Google also gains the ability to sublicense those technologies out to VP8 users, clearing the way for the company to push adoption of VP8 ? and by extension, WebM ? with impunity. "This is a significant milestone in Google's efforts to establish VP8 as a widely-deployed web video format," said Allen Lo, Google's deputy general counsel for patents.

MPEG LA is calling off the patent pool

Google bought VP8 in 2010 before open-sourcing the technology, but MPEG LA had stated publicly that it felt the codec infringed upon some of its patented technologies. MPEG LA licenses the technologies at the heart of an assortment of different video codecs and formats, including H.264 and MPEG-2. MPEG LA had gone so far as to start the process of forming a patent pool to go after Google for said infringement; with today's agreement, it will cease those efforts.

The agreement covers both VP8 and previous generations of the codec, and also affords Google the opportunity to use those techniques in one additional generation of the VPx family ? an important consideration given that Google has already built VP9 into its Chromium web browser. While the licensing agreement isn't a direct admission that VP8 wasn't as unencumbered as had once been advertised, at the very least it's a clear signal that Google is more interested in pushing forward with its own set of preferred standards ? even if there's an associated cost ? rather than getting embroiled in a string of patent lawsuits.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/7/4076042/google-enters-into-licensing-agreement-with-mpeg-la-to-protect-the

as non DRM formats already ready-ly available to public,

i wont support the new format if its DRM ridden.

Then you won't get access to movies etc. I can understand why companies want DRM. The issue I have with DRM is the way some companies have implemented it i.e. Games that are online only, music CD's that install rootkits etc.

This would be awesome if VP8 was as good as H.264. Maybe VP9 is, but it's also the last version allowed by this agreement.

The problem with VP8/9 vs H.264 is that H.264 is what TV is encoded in for OTA transmission, and what most Blu-rays are encoded in. It's supported natively by Windows and Mac, and it has a plethora of open source tools that support it like FFMPEG and X264. It's what the vast majority of video streamed on the internet is encoded in. It's what the vast majority of TV and movies are pirated in. And, on top of all that it is a great quality codec.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • If you don't care to read what I said, then you prove my point. Maybe written media is beyond your attention span. Titles are not summaries my friend.
    • Nobody asked... in fact, I said "I don't care about political leanings"  
    • TLDR. Here is a far better title (just a basic example): Windows 11 26H2 to allow disabling Web search results
    • Restore will get my vote, only if to see if things are any different, doubt it though but Labour and Conservatives too out of touch and same thing over and over and over…, Lib Dem who?
    • There is nothing wrong with this title. You have completely missed the plot when it comes to "clickbait." The issue was never that a title tries to entice you to click, that is how titles have worked for over 100 years. The issue is when the title subverts expectations, getting you to click expecting something that isn't there. The classic clickbait example is "Boyfriend caught cheating, what happens next will shock you," then what happened next is the girlfriend was upset...which is probably the least shocking outcome imaginable. If sounds like what you want is for the titles to be a collection of 10-word summaries that you can skim, get the just of the story, and only click if you want more details. That is not, never has been, and never will be what titles are. You can go all the way back to print newspapers during the great depression and see the same thing. The newspaper was locked in a vending machine, all you can see is the headline, you choose to put in 5¢ to buy the paper and read the rest if you want. Those headlines were written in a way to sell the paper, not just to provide a summery. Here are two actual headlines from that time, "Wall Street Lays an Egg," or "Stocks Hit Bottom?" Maybe you'd say something like "it was wrong then and it's still wrong now." Okay, fine opinion to have, but it isn't like Neowin is doing something unjurnalistic, they are just following the age-old standards for written media.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      525
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      199
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!