The H.264 Licensing Labyrinth

Second, objections from nonlicensees will continue, but for reasons other than the actual licensing fee structure. Given the known cost of a standards-based codec, unlike the unknown cost of a proprietary codec, it appears that many of the criticisms leveled at H.264 licensing are based on critics being upset about paying a known amount for something they equate to open source. Mistaking standards-based for open source, they act on the first part of a famous quote ("data wants to be free"), forgetting the second part of the same quote: "and data wants to be very expensive."

In the end, for a fair comparison of licensing fees, it is up to the proprietary codec creators to lay the licensing cards on the table rather than using the fact that MPEG LA does so as a means to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

"Patent holders enable MPEG LA to offer a valuable service to both Licensors and Licensees," said MPEG LA’s O’Reilly. "We daresay the market is better off for having this opportunity than not, and based on the success of the AVC License program (23 Licensors and more than 550 Licensees), the market seems to agree."

To Infinity and Beyond: MPEG LA Extends H.264 Internet Video Moratorium Indefinitely

The standards body extended in perpetuity the royalty-free license on internet video that's free to users from 2015

26 Aug 2010