|
|
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
− | {{navbox}}
| + | You're the gtreaest! JMHO |
− | :(''For the general video codec problem see: [[Audio-video patents]]'')
| |
− | '''MPEG LA''' is an organisation (which could be called a [[patent cartel]]) which holds a collection of [[software patents]] which it claims are essential for the implementation of MPEG video formats including H.264. MPEG LA is in no way affiliated with the MPEG standards group.
| |
− | | |
− | MPEG LA lists over 1,000 patents, held by 29 companies<ref>http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/</ref> divided between 57 countries which they claim are necessary to implement MPEG video formats.<ref>http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/226/n-10-02-02.pdf</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | MPEG LA's patents are the reason H.264 was excluded from the [[HTML5]] specification.
| |
− | | |
− | ==Details of their patent thickets==
| |
− | | |
− | [[MPEG LA]] is the licensing authority for a thicket of over 1,000 patents, held by 29 companies. MPEG LA claims that 1,000 of these patents must be licensed in order to use the common H.264 video format.<ref>http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/</ref> which it claims are requried for use of MPEG video formats. The holders of these patents include [[Columbia University]], [[Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute of Korea]] (ETRI), [[France Télécom]], [[Fujitsu]], [[LG Electronics]], [[Matsushita]] (Panasonic), [[Mitsubishi]], [[Microsoft]], [[Motorola]], [[Nokia]], [[Philips]], [[Robert Bosch GmbH]], [[Samsung]], [[Sharp]], [[Sony]], [[Toshiba]], and [[Victor Company of Japan]] (JVC).<ref>http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html</ref> The last MPEG LA listed patents don't expire until 2028 in the US.<ref>http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-July/020737.html</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | As of February 2010, MPEG LA lists 639 companies which are paying this patent tax.<ref>http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/M4V/Pages/Licensees.aspx</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | Microsoft is both a large owner, with 75 patents in this pool, and is also a large licensee, paying about twice as much to MPEG LA as they receive in royalties.<ref>http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2010/05/03/follow-up-on-html5-video-in-ie9.aspx ''Microsoft receives back from MPEG LA less than half the amount for the patent rights that it contributes''</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | ==MPEG LA's patent aggression==
| |
− | | |
− | * [http://www.twice.com/article/257658-Audiovox_Disputes_MPEG_LA_Lawsuit.php Audiovox Disputes MPEG LA Lawsuit], 26 Dec 2007, '''Twice.com'''
| |
− | * [http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20100329006257/en/MPEG-LA-Lawsuit-Alcatel-Lucent-Settled MPEG LA Lawsuit Against Alcatel Lucent Settled], 29 Mar 2009, '''MPEG LA PR'''
| |
− | * [http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/legal-services-litigation/5917877-1.html MPEG LA Sues Apex Digital, Inc. for Breach of MPEG-2 License Agreement; Apex Fails to Pay...], 8 Aug 2002, '''AllBusiness'''
| |
− | * [http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleFriendlyCC.jsp?id=1202448222920 Patent Litigation Weekly: MobileMedia's Unusual Patent Infringement Campaign], 19 Apr 2010, '''Pat Lit Weekly''' (MPEG LA owns "MobileMedia")
| |
− | * Also related: [http://java.dzone.com/dose/dzone-daily-dose-524-0 Daily Dose - Nero AG Hits MPEG-LA With Antitrust Lawsuit], 25 May 2010, '''Javalobby'''
| |
− | | |
− | ===Threatening WebM, VP8, and Ogg Theora===
| |
− | | |
− | :''(See: [[VP8 and WebM]] and [[Ogg Theora]])''
| |
− | | |
− | MPEG LA has said that it considers Ogg Theora to be infringing their patents, and that they are looking into building a list of patents for which they would demand royalties for WebM.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/21/mpegla_mulls_patent_license_for_webm/|title=Google open video codec may face patent clash|quote=Yes. In view of the marketplace uncertainties regarding patent licensing needs for such technologies, [...] in accessing essential patent rights for VP8 as well as other codecs, and we are looking into the prospects of doing so.}}</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | ==A free licence for almost nobody==
| |
− | | |
− | In August 2010, MPEG LA announced that they would not use their patents against people distributing video non-commercially over the Internet.<ref>http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/231/n-10-08-26.pdf</ref><ref>http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20100825006629/en</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | However, this does not permit the distribution of software to play or create videos,<ref>http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/08/hold-the-h264-celebrations/index.htm</ref> and would not apply to a webpage with ads.<ref>http://www.osnews.com/story/23735/MPEG-LA_Makes_Free_Internet_Video_Royalty_Free_Perpetually</ref>
| |
− | | |
− | ==MPEG LA isn't the only group you have to pay==
| |
− | | |
− | [[AT&T]]<ref>http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/04/know-your-rights-h-264-patent-licensing-and-you/</ref> and [[Philips]]<ref>http://ipgeek.blogspot.com/2007/02/you-thought-paying-sisvel-ended-your.html</ref>, both claim to have further patents required for implementations of MPEG video.
| |
− | | |
− | It is also possible that other patent holders are preparing a [[patent ambush]].
| |
− | | |
− | ==Avoiding H.264==
| |
− | | |
− | [[Campaigns to avoid certain patented ideas|Campaigns to avoid]] H.264 generally focus on encouraging the use the [[Ogg Theora]] video format and, recently, on the [[WebM]] format.
| |
− | | |
− | Another possibility is to [[use software from 20 years ago]], such as the ITU h.261 video format, some parts of which were defined in, or before, November 1988[http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.261/recommendation.asp?lang=en&parent=T-REC-H.261-198811-S]. The 1988 spec had parts that were not defined. The 1990 H.261 spec filled in these parts[http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.261/recommendation.asp?lang=en&parent=T-REC-H.261-199012-S].
| |
− | | |
− | ==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==
| |
− | * [[Harm to standards]]
| |
− | * [[HTML5]]
| |
− | * [[Audio-video patents]]
| |
− | * [[WebM and VP8]]
| |
− | * [[Video formats from 20 years ago]]
| |
− | | |
− | ==External links==
| |
− | * [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG_LA Wikipedia: MPEG LA]
| |
− | * [http://ipgeek.blogspot.com/2007/02/you-thought-paying-sisvel-ended-your.html Philips also has patents on mpeg]
| |
− | * [http://web.archive.org/web/20060612210555/http://web.media.mit.edu/~eds/mpeg-patents-faq mpeg-patents-faq ("especially for audio compression")]
| |
− | * [http://bemasc.net/wordpress/2010/02/02/no-you-cant-do-that-with-h264/ No, you can’t do that with H.264], 2 Feb 2010, '''Ben Schwartz'''
| |
− | * http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/MPEG_patent_status - info and links about MPEG-1 (could be used to check if this page is correct regarding MPEG-1/h.261)
| |
− | * [http://www.betanews.com/article/10-questions-for-MPEG-LA-on-H264/1274306999 10 questions for MPEG LA on H.264], May 2010, '''Beta News''' - just ''before'' [[On2 VP8]] was released as [[free software]] by [[Google]]
| |
− | * [http://www.osnews.com/story/23346/Nero_Files_Antitrust_Case_Against_MPEG-LA Nero Files Antitrust Case Against MPEG LA], '''OSNews''' (see also: [[Antitrust law isn't solving the problems]])
| |
− | ** [http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202458503025&MPEG_LA_Shrugs_Off_Antitrust_Allegations MPEG LA Shrugs Off Antitrust Allegations], May 20th 2010
| |
− | * [http://osindia.blogspot.com/2010/06/challenges-in-using-proprietary.html Flash Co-Creator Jonathan Gay talks of the challenges they faced in using H.264 standard], June 2010, '''OS India'''
| |
− | * [http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2008/7/18/232618/312 Patent Status of MPEG-1,H.261 and MPEG-2], 20 July 2008, '''Josh Cogliati'''
| |
− | * [http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2009-July/020737.html List of H.264 patents and expiration dates], 3 July 2009, '''Josh Cogliati'''
| |
− | * [http://www.osnews.com/story/23735/MPEG-LA_Makes_Free_Internet_Video_Royalty_Free_Perpetually MPEG LA Makes Free Internet Video Royalty Free Perpetually], 26 Aug 2010, '''OSNews'''
| |
− | | |
− | ===mpegla.com===
| |
− | | |
− | * [http://www.mpegla.com/news/n_03-11-17_avc.html MpegLA announces it's consolidated patent claims over H.264], with a list at the end with 17 of the patent holders
| |
− | * [http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Agreement.aspx MPEG LA's licensing terms]
| |
− | * [http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/PatentList.aspx The full list of patents]
| |
− | * [http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensors.aspx The full list of the patent holders]
| |
− | | |
− | ==References==
| |
− | {{reflist}}
| |
− | | |
− | | |
− | {{footer}}
| |
− | [[Category:Organisations]]
| |
− | [[Category:Pages with advice for avoiding patented ideas]]
| |
− | [[Category:Example software patents]]
| |