Comments on: What Does Nokia Want out of WebRTC? https://bloggeek.me/nokia-webrtc/ The leading authority on WebRTC Sun, 09 Feb 2020 08:05:10 +0000 hourly 1 By: Tsahi Levent-Levi https://bloggeek.me/nokia-webrtc/#comment-116631 Sat, 06 Apr 2013 19:57:23 +0000 http://bloggeek.me/?p=2238#comment-116631 In reply to Paul E. Jones.

Paul,

I am not sure I agree. H.264 might have MPEG-LA, but they are not the only patent holders. This makes licensing complex and expensive for H.264 as well.

]]> By: Paul E. Jones https://bloggeek.me/nokia-webrtc/#comment-116630 Fri, 29 Mar 2013 03:26:54 +0000 http://bloggeek.me/?p=2238#comment-116630 Making VP8 MTI is very dangerous. Some time ago, the claim was that there was no IPR on VP8. Then the claim was only Google had it and they were going to license it freely or with reciprocity agreements. I said then that there were probably others out there with IPR and they just have not said anything. It took a while, but now there are several companies that have claimed IPR. How many more are there? Who knows. Something to consider is that none of these companies are required to make any IPR declarations on VP8, either. So, Nokia or anyone else making claims would actually be doing us a favor. Still, there are those who are likely remaining silent.

Should VP8 become mandatory, Nokia might be forced to implement it. This actually puts a lot of risk on them, too. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of people who worked on H.264. There are many patents on H.264 and many more that cover closely-related video coding techniques. Just one or a few of those people demanding an award for damages related to VP8 would be horrible for the industry and horrible for Nokia.

Where things are now, we know the IPR holders on H.264, but we do not know the IPR holders on VP8.

]]>