MPEG-LA Follows Through On Its Promise To Go After Google For Daring To Offer Patent-Free Video
from the we-must-find-some-patents! dept
Right after Google announced that it was "freeing" up its VP8 video codec under the WebM name, in an effort to get away from the heavily patented H.264 standard, MPEG-LA, the private company that manages the H.264 patent pool and has done some patent trolling at times, announced that it was planning to set up a patent pool around VP8 insisting that it simply wasn't possible that there could be a web video standard that wasn't patented (and wasn't paying MPEG-LA, I guess).That was back in May, and it's taken until February, but MPEG-LA has officially put out a call for patents that cover VP8. That's a pretty clear declaration of war. It's also fairly obnoxious. What sort of organization blatantly says "Company X has released a cool technology to the world, and we're going to find any and all patents that will destroy that?" What an incredibly anti-innovation stance.
That said, I do wonder why it took so long between announcing the original plans and making this call. Perhaps it's discovered that it wasn't quite as easy as they had hoped to find patents that cover VP8. For its part, Google insists it's committed to fighting to keep V8 patent-free, and hopefully it stands by that commitment.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: online video, patents, video, vp8, webm
Companies: google, mpeg-la
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
In spite of being an industry standard codec. Well played, folks. You just pissed off one of the largest tech companies in the world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Microsoft is releasing "plugins" for H.264 for both Firefox and Chrome (which IIRC have dropped built-in support for the codec, or will soon). I suppose since Microsoft is already paying (or rather, users are paying) for H.264 to be in WMP, so this makes no big difference to them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MPEG starts development of royalty-free video codec standard
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Incredible
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MPEG starts development of royalty-free video codec standard
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"MPEG-LA Follows Through On Its Promise To Go After Google For Daring To Offer Patent-Free Video"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh, it is very easy to find patents that cover VP8. Just look at the patents On2 had. Most or quite possibly all the non-expired valid patents that cover VP8 will be there.
A lot of people incorrectly think VP8 is patent-free. It is not. It is royalty-free, because Google explicitly licensed these patents to everyone. See http://www.webmproject.org/license/additional/ for that license. As an aside, if anyone has a list of the On2 VP8 patents, I am curious to look at them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The question is really "Are there any patents on VP8 that Google does not control?"
If there are, and MPEG-LA gets their hands on one then Google's booby trap will go off and basically no-one will be able to use VP8. This will be a tragedy - but it will expose the hypocrisy of MPEG-LA (who go on about the supposed benefits of their patent licensing scheme).
They will be shown to be nothing more than the IP "mob" running a protection racket.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's widely known that WebM is an inferior codec to H.264 in terms of quality, so it's freeness is really it's only advantage. Personally - I don't like having WebM shoved down our throats like Google is planning to do (by taking native H.264 support out of Chrome). Should be interesting.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
And as I mentioned above: it is not patent-free, it is royalty-free. Nobody is claiming it to be patent-free, because it is not: Google has the On2 patents on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
This should be a hilarious chicken and egg scenario, as every patent comes out, every patent will be bypassed probably within a week.
Maybe this will be the perfect example of how patents don't fit in society today as even patents can't keep up with software.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
MPEG-LA id basically a business conspiracy against the public interest. What do you expect?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MPEG-LA is obviously a greedy bunch of people, trying to make all the money they can before their patents expire.
Google is the ultimate "get in the middle of everything" company, attempting to expand their tentacles in another direction. If V8 was fronted by anyone other than Google, I would feel better. But with Google at the helm, I can't help but feel that more of my personal data and surfing habits will be monitored and remembered by the borg.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Incredible
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MPEG LA
Oddly the benefits to patent holders and benefits to technology developers are identical...
Hmmm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Then they'll laugh alone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://www.v8juice.com/
Now juice means power [as in mob (la Casa Nostra].
http://www.yourdictionary.com/juice
See item 8.
And a fruit is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_(slang)
So the meaning is very clear.
You have a group of vegetable deviants seeking greater power.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MPEG starts development of royalty-free video codec standard
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
There is no free lunch, and Google knows how to sell lunch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Market
"in view of the marketplace uncertainties regarding patent licensing needs for such technologies, there have been expressions of interest from the market urging us to facilitate formation of licenses that would address the market’s need for a convenient one-stop marketplace alternative to negotiating separate licenses with individual patent holders in accessing essential patent rights for VP8 as well as other codecs, and we are looking into the prospects of doing so."
I'm not sure I've ever seen that word used more times in one sentence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Market
they keep using that word. i do not think it means what they think it means.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
You're an idiot. Do you think people won't notice this. People will notice and Google knows it.
I doubt the patent has included in its description some tracking feature that lets Google track you. Then, all I have to do to not infringe, at least on that part, is not include that tracking feature. and I highly doubt Google will freely license their patents under the condition that others write code in the software that lets us track them. You're simply making things up now.
As far as getting in the middle, you aren't forced to use the codec. You can always use another codec, but MPEG will likely have a patent on that codec and they will likely get in the middle of your use by suing you. Which do you prefer? Google is doing a good thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
I read the full spec. There is no such thing. VP8 is nothing more than a video compression scheme (uncompressed YUV video enters from one side, VP8 compressed video comes the other side - and vice versa for the decompressor). Vorbis (the audio part) comes from outside Google, and it is also nothing more than an audio compressor. And WebM (the container which is what you usually see, it has a VP8 and a Vorbis stream within it) is nothing more than a restricted version of Matroska (which you might have already seen as .mkv files elsewhere), which again is from outside Google and is nothing more than a multimedia container format.
There is no tracking or reporting concept in Matroska as far as I know, and even if there were it would depend on being implemented by the players (good luck getting them to agree to do so). Even less so in the more restricted WebM format, which only allows for some of the Matroska tags.
As for overlays, there are no overlays in WebM as far as I know (other than perhaps subtitles, though the documentation says it currently does not have subtitles). Even if there were, there is nothing in the specification which would prevents its use by others; it is completely open.
No, where Google gains in this is obvious: Youtube. WebM is clearly a ploy against MPEG-LA, and it already has had some success (by making them extend their "promise" of not requiring a license in certain situations). Without the threat of WebM, nothing prevents MPEG-LA from jacking up the prices. With WebM on the table, they can negotiate better prices, or else they will convert Youtube completely to VP8 (Google can do this, since most users play Youtube using Flash, and Adobe has already agreed to add VP8 as a codec in Flash - which, given that they already used On2's previous codecs, is not surprising), which would weaken MPEG-LA's monopoly (you would not need H.264 anymore for the most popular video site in the Internet).
By releasing it as royalty-free, they instantly gained the support of one of the most popular browsers (Firefox), and the support of the entire free software community (which has long been tired of not being able to implement good-quality video codecs in countries which allow for software patents). Plus an amount of goodwill (they like having the image of being the "good guys", and this image is good for business).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Market
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Market
A patent pool with once license to pay is better than lots of separate companies with their own patents fighting each other and allowing the users to get caught in the crossfire.
This is true - unfortunately for them a patent pool is a lot worse than having a codec that has an irrevocable (provided you don't claim your own patent is infringed and take us to court) royalty free license available to everyone.
Basically their logic is the logic of the mob. Better to have one gang boss in firm control rather than competing gangs fighting it out on the streets.
Of course the best solution of all is to have proper law and order (ie fix the patent system to eliminate s/w patents). In the absence of that Google is stepping in as a kind of "superhero" fighting legal IP violence with its own legal IP booby traps.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Market
A patent pool with once license to pay is better than lots of separate companies with their own patents fighting each other and allowing the users to get caught in the crossfire.
If their position were stated honestly, it's that encumbering VP8 with a patent pool is better (for MPEG-LA) than allowing it to compete with H.264 as a royalty-free alternative.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
How is that shoving it down your throat? Did someone configure your computer so that it only runs Google Chrome? Did they deny you access to the source code?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You would be hard pressed to noticed the difference, which is only apparent when you compare the two video streams side by side and even then it is hard to see the differences cause they are so subtle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You would be hard pressed to noticed the difference, which is only apparent when you compare the two video streams side by side and even then it is hard to see the differences cause they are so subtle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Market
They state the advantages of a patent pool over a patent thicket - but what Google is offering is better still and they don't want to compete with that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Market
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
only keep the people/company who have sued somebody over VP8 for violating a patent from continuing to use VP8.
What this means is that if you sue, you must then stop using VP8 in any way, including examining the source code for patent infringement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
corporations..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: corporations..
The reality? Just like the internet, true innovators look at a patent as a "fault" or a "broken path", and look for other ways to go around the path. They spend the time and the effort to find better solutions and to move forward, effectively circumventing the "broken path".
Real innovation happens when there is motivation. Mike just doesn't like to admit it is possible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It would be funny for Google to switch all the encoding on Youtube from H.264 to Web M. Google has the ability and MPEG-LA just gave them a good reason to do it. Chrome already supports WebM, Firefox is supporting WebM also.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Mozilla objects to the way H.264 is being handled and choses to only include open tech with in Firefox.
I can't say that I disagree with Mozilla; and to some extent Google, on the decision not to support H.264 and rather support open alternatives in Theora and WebM in their browsers.
It likely will not matter much unless Google drops H.264 encoding for Youtube (which they could do), since the main push for H.264 has been for mobile devices.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: corporations..
You clearly don't work in the software business. Quite often in fact, idea/process patents cover the result not the method. There are no shopping carts that don't infringe or websites with databases on the back end for that matter. Those are not inventions, they're deal breakers and there's no doubt that theres one in every codec, no matter how original. You simply don't understand. When they say "Every codec infringes" that's precisely what they mean.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: corporations..
Does it make you feel all warm inside every time you lie about what I believe?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100518/2343189483.shtml
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Patent Abandonment
1. Require a statement of intended use by the applicant.
2. Provide an abandonment rule for patents similar to that of trademarks. If a patent has not been placed into commerce (under a substantial activities test) consistent with the intended use, then the patent should lapse.
This would eliminate most trolls since they survive on old patents that have never been used (or whose application to a use was never contemplated). It would also free-up the innovation process.
PRK
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: corporations..
It makes him feel all warm for a minute while he wets his pants, but then it gets cold.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Shame on you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: corporations..
On2 did look for ways to go around the path. But since the MPEG-LA cartel has immorally sought to gather patents from everyone and prevent others from competing, that was a problem. Still, On2 did it. And what happens? The MPEG-LA mafia tries to hijack VP8!
[ link to this | view in thread ]