Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:42 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
MPEG LA Declares H.264 Standard Permanently Royalty-Free






MPEG LA, the group that oversees licensing for a number of Internet media standards, today announced that Internet broadcast content using the H.264 video coding standard will remain royalty-free for the entire life of the license, quashing fears that the standard could suddenly become subject to royalty payments in 2016 after the current licensing term expires and is required to be renewed.
Quote:
MPEG LA announced today that its AVC Patent Portfolio License will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as "Internet Broadcast AVC Video") during the entire life of this License. MPEG LA previously announced it would not charge royalties for such video through December 31, 2015, and today's announcement makes clear that royalties will continue not to be charged for such video beyond that time.
H.264 is the video content standard that has been embraced by a broad array of content providers including Apple, which owns several of the patents included in the technology's portfolio. Today's announcement also paves the way for H.264 to become the standard video format for HTML5, which had seen some contributors, such as Mozilla and Opera, supporting Ogg Theora as a royalty-free video standard.

Earlier this year, Google announced its own video standard, WebM, claiming that it would be a royalty-free alternative to H.264. Questions were raised, however, about whether WebM truly could be royalty-free, with MPEG LA even going as far as to suggest that it was looking into putting together a patent pool to assert the rights of intellectual property holders associated with the WebM/VP8 standard.

Article Link: MPEG LA Declares H.264 Standard Permanently Royalty-Free
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:43 PM   #2
RAS admin
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Berkshires, Mass.
Yay!
__________________
www.SolarSystemStudio.com
17" MacBook Pro 2.3GHz, 30" Cinema Display, iPhone 4 S⃣ , iPod Nano 6G
RAS admin is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:43 PM   #3
INeedAMacBook
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Send a message via MSN to INeedAMacBook
good good
__________________
Mid 2010 13' Macbook Pro 2.4
iPhone 3gs white 32gb
iPad 64GB 3G-Sold
iPad 2-Coming soon.
INeedAMacBook is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:44 PM   #4
bentoon
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NYC
Brilliant!
bentoon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:47 PM   #5
djrod
macrumors 6502a
 
djrod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Madrid - Spain
Hell yeah!!!!
__________________
404 : Signature not found
djrod is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:50 PM   #6
macus3r
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
WOW. This is a BIG DEAL for Apple and makes the content providers look like asses if they don't sign on to iTunes download model.

Apple was never in the business to make royalties through H.264, doing that would jeopardize the ultimate goal of selling more profitable hardware devices.

GoogleTV? what?
macus3r is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:51 PM   #7
Small White Car
macrumors G4
 
Small White Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Washington DC
Well, that's just great.

There goes several thousand man-hours wasted on Macrumors arguments.

THANKS A LOT, MPEG LA! Don't you know how hard we worked on those threads?

Poof. All useless now.
Small White Car is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:52 PM   #8
sziehr
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
well this is great news. There is no question apple won this war after what they learned with firewire free is the way to fly. This is going to hurt googles own project and solidly kill flash. There is now no reason not to do html5 and h.264 encoding of all online content
__________________
FLICKR
sziehr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:53 PM   #9
RawBert
macrumors 68000
 
RawBert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Good standards = better internet

* applause*
__________________
THE ART OF RAW
Steve Lives On
RawBert is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:53 PM   #10
jeznav
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Eh?
Ha! Take that H.264 haters!

So...Firefox whatcha gonna do?
jeznav is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:53 PM   #11
Small White Car
macrumors G4
 
Small White Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Washington DC
Oh, and does this mean Firefox can finally get off their high horse and join everyone else's HTML 5 plans?

Or did they have other reasons for going it alone on that one?
Small White Car is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:53 PM   #12
techpr
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Juan, PR
Bye Bye WebM ?
__________________
http://twitter.com/barcelo
techpr is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:56 PM   #13
bobr1952
macrumors 68000
 
bobr1952's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne, FL
Well only one negative so far.
__________________
2012 rMPB, 2.3 Intel Core i7, 8GB Ram, 256 SSD; 2008 iMac, 24", 2GB, 500GB; Time Capsule 500GB (1st Gen); ATV3; ATV2; Airport Express; Black 64GB iPhone 4S; Black iPad Air, 32GB, wi-fi
bobr1952 is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:57 PM   #14
dagamer34
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Small White Car View Post
Oh, and does this mean Firefox can finally get off their high horse and join everyone else's HTML 5 plans?

Or did they have other reasons for going it alone on that one?
Royalty free for streaming does not mean royalty free for packaging encoders and decoders.
dagamer34 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:57 PM   #15
BaldiMac
macrumors 604
 
BaldiMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Small White Car View Post
Oh, and does this mean Firefox can finally get off their high horse and join everyone else's HTML 5 plans?

Or did they have other reasons for going it alone on that one?
Nope. This does not change the licensing fees that Firefox would have to pay. (I think I read that it would be in the $5 million range.) It only applies to video distribution that is free to end users, which has always been free.
BaldiMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:57 PM   #16
PaperMacWriter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Google's $106.6 Million spent on On2 just became worthless. Poof.
But thank god we're not stuck in a war with formats now. Now Mozilla can have a good product without needing to pay any of their money to people.
This makes me happy.
~SG
__________________
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." - Sir Winston Churchill
Bertrand Pierre the 13" 2.26GHz MacBook Pro; Iniesta the 32GB iPhone 4
PaperMacWriter is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:57 PM   #17
superstrikertwo
macrumors 6502a
 
superstrikertwo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: California
Send a message via MSN to superstrikertwo
Quote:
Originally Posted by sziehr View Post
well this is great news. There is no question apple won this war after what they learned with firewire free is the way to fly. This is going to hurt googles own project and solidly kill flash. There is now no reason not to do html5 and h.264 encoding of all online content
Google supported H.264 as well. They also supported other formats which in my opinion was the smart thing to do at the time as there was no clear "winner" in the format war.
__________________
iPhone 6 Space Grey 64gb AT&T
iPad Air Space Grey 32GB WiFi
Mid-2010 MacBook Pro 17"
superstrikertwo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:58 PM   #18
Erwin-Br
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: The Netherlands
Hurray! Fantastic news! I'm not so sure this would've happened without the competition of a free alternative, so hurray for Google as well.
__________________
Mac Pro - 2x 2.8GHz Quad Core Xeon, 16GB, 8800GT Mac Mini - 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 1GB iPod Touch - Gen 2, 16 GB
Erwin-Br is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:58 PM   #19
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Peace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
*cough*
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:58 PM   #20
Data
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Sounds like BIG news to me, and good aswell.
__________________
Once you go Mac , you never go back....I always said, but now steve has gone, time will tell ;-).
Data is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:58 PM   #21
cube
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: May 2004
The headline is too broad.
cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:59 PM   #22
iWonderwhy
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
See Google, Mozilla, Opera? All you had to do was be patient.
iWonderwhy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:59 PM   #23
sciwizam
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Don't Opera and Mozilla still have to pay for a license to include the decoders? Note that the PR says it's "free to end users".


Got this from one of the comments on Arstechnica:

Quote:
In page 2 of The AVC Licensing terms (http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/...rmsSummary.pdf)

Quote:
In the case of the (a) encoder and decoder manufacturer sublicenses:

For (a) (1) branded encoder and decoder products sold both to end users and on an OEM
basis for incorporation into personal computers but not part of an operating system (a
decoder, encoder, or product consisting of one decoder and one encoder = “unit”),
royalties (beginning January 1, 2005) per legal entity are 0 - 100,000 units per year = no
royalty (this threshold is available to one legal entity in an affiliated group); US $0.20 per
unit after first 100,000 units each year; above 5 million units per year, royalty = US $0.10
per unit. The maximum annual royalty (“cap”) for an enterprise (commonly controlled
legal entities) is $3.5 million per year 2005-2006, $4.25 million per year 2007-08, $5
million per year 2009-10.8


For (a) (2) branded encoder and decoder products sold on an OEM basis for incorporation
into personal computers as part of a computer operating system, a legal entity may pay
for its customers as follows (beginning January 1, 2005): 0 - 100,000 units/year = no
royalty (available to one legal entity in an affiliated group); US $0.20 per unit after first
100,000 units/year; above 5 million units/year, royalty = US $0.10 per unit. The
maximum annual royalty (“cap”) for an enterprise (commonly controlled legal entities) is
$3.5 million per year in 2005-2006, $4.25 million per year in 2007-08 and $5 million per
year in 2009-10.9
sciwizam is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 03:59 PM   #24
ruinfx
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
this actually hasnt changed anything as far as mozilla/opera are concerned...it would be nice if the original article covered that. too many uninformed people will (and apparently already have judging by the first couple of replies) misinterpret this posting.
__________________
15" 2.3GHz Retina MacBook Pro
8GB iPod Touch 4G
ruinfx is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 26, 2010, 04:01 PM   #25
PeterQVenkman
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
Take a closer look:

Quote:
MPEG LA announced today that its AVC Patent Portfolio License will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as "Internet Broadcast AVC Video") during the entire life of this License. MPEG LA previously announced it would not charge royalties for such video through December 31, 2015, and today's announcement makes clear that royalties will continue not to be charged for such video beyond that time.
If you charge money for your content you will still have to pay royalties. I don't know if that counts content with advertising or not (like hulu or youtube) - because you would be making money off of h264 content that way.

Sites like Digital Tutors, lynda.com, etc, if they provide a downloadable version in h264, they would be obligated to pay. All my classes from FXPHD.com are h264 encoded. I'm sure they'll switch to something else now.
PeterQVenkman is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
royalty free rock music gurungnepal Digital Audio 0 Jul 25, 2013 11:40 AM
Royalty free videos? sunandsurf Digital Video 10 May 21, 2013 02:10 AM
HandBrake: mpeg-4(ffmpeg) vs. h.264 TJ61 Apple TV and Home Theater 2 Feb 23, 2013 04:23 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC