-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Flash Co-Creator Jonathan Gay talks of the challenges they faced in using H.264 standard.
,----[ Quote ]
| The second challenge was selecting a video
| codec. We wanted to use the cool new H.264
| open standard but Macromedia did not feel
| they could afford the H.264 license fee. I
| believe that the capped $5M per year H.264
| license fee was similar in scale to the
| annual Flash engineering budget at the
| time. The H.264 license fee model is very
| anticompetitive. H.264 licensing is free
| for very small users, expensive for medium
| size companies and inexpensive for very
| large companies. This model puts the
| midsize companies who could challenge the
| dominant companies at a significant
| competitive disadvantage and is the reason
| that we implemented the proprietary but
| affordable On2 codec in Flash instead of
| the open and expensive H.264 codec.
`----
http://osindia.blogspot.com/2010/06/challenges-in-using-proprietary.html
The Ubuntu Advantage? Canonical Takes On Red Hat
,----[ Quote ]
| When it comes to patents, itâs not just
| about proving someone wrong. A company like
| Microsoft needs only put in an application
| to the court to have all possibly offending
| products stopped from shipping (remember
| when Microsoft had to stop selling Office
| over those XML issues?). The big problem is
| not whether one is right or wrong about
| patent infringement, that takes a long time
| to come out in court. What hurts are
| injunctions put on the products a company
| sells. Take Tom Tom for example. They had
| to settle because if they didnât, Microsoft
| could have shut down their business by
| stopping the sale of their products until
| the court case was settled, but then
| dragging the court case out for years and
| years. Few companies could afford to fight
| that.
|
| Red Hat on the other hand, has a massive
| port folio themselves and agreements with
| other corporations to share pool patents.
| If Microsoft sued Red Hat, it would be on
| for young and old. This is why itâs an arms
| race. If Microsoft sued Canonical, could it
| withstand the pressure? I highly doubt it.
| Not unless it has the backing of other big
| guns. Insurance wonât cut it long term,
| especially after the first few cases and
| premiums go through the roof. Of course,
| this does leave one other option on the
| table for Canonical. Settle and pay for
| patent protection. Indeed, this is written
| into their assurance (emphasis mine):
|
| âCanonical will replace or modify the
| infringing portion of the software so
| that it becomes non-infringing, or
| obtain the rights for you to continue
| using the software.â
|
| Microsoft has already approached Canonical
| pressuring them to sign up to a patent
| deal, but they turned it down. Does this
| mean they might have to re-consider their
| position? Certainly Ubuntu ships with VFAT
| support.
`----
http://www.linux-mag.com/cache/7803/1.html
Recent:
The Wild Fox Firefox Fork to Bring Support for H.264
http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Wild-Fox-Firefox-Fork-to-Bring-Support-for-H-264-142185.shtml
Will The Wild Fox Firefox Fork Disregard Patents?
,----[ Quote ]
| Most of us users of Mozilla's Firefox
| browser are used to getting new versions
| of Firefox from Mozilla, but, like many
| open source projects, Firefox has already
| been forked into other versions. Now, as
| OSnews reports, a new fork of the browser
| is taking shape. Dubbed Wild Fox, one of
| the more interesting new aspect of it is
| that it supports the H.264 coded for
| video. However, the way the new fork
| treats patents could cause trouble.
`----
http://ostatic.com/blog/will-the-wild-fox-firefox-fork-disregard-patents
Developer wants to stick an H.264 fork in Firefox
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2010/05/16/developer-wants-to-stick-an-h-264-fork-in-firefox/
Firefox With H.264 HTML 5 Support = Wild Fox
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/05/15/2238236/Firefox-With-H264-HTML-5-Support--Wild-Fox
Wild Fox: Firefox Fork with H.264 Support
,----[ Quote ]
| Mozilla, sticking to its ideals of the
| open web, decided long ago that support
| for the patent-encumbered H264 codec would
| not be included in any of its products.
| Not only is H264 wholly incompatible with
| the open web and Free software, it is also
| incredibly expensive. Mozilla could use
| one of the open source implementations,
| but those are not licensed, and the MPEG-
| LA has been quite clear in that it will
| sue those who encode or decode H264
| content without a license. Software
| patents, however, are only valid in some
| parts of the world, so an enterprising
| developer has started a project that was
| sure to come eventually: Firefox builds
| with H264 support.
`----
http://www.osnews.com/story/23303/Wild_Fox_Firefox_Fork_with_H_264_Support
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkwShJMACgkQU4xAY3RXLo4SzACgn+q57Iq4/qcy+uyqrmDYDHsv
XacAoLBenqD62GHl7csh0t4Qu1YwlXio
=theD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
