ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "MPEG LA"

(Undo revision 22638 by Ciaran (talk))
(Details of their patent thickets: Footnote 5:Link MPEG LA's press release was defunct. Repaired.)
(24 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
HHIS I should have tohhugt of that!
+
:(''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 (346 in the USA alone<ref>I counted on 23 May 2012</ref>), 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/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/28/n_03-11-17_avc.html</ref>  The last MPEG LA listed patents don't expire until 2027 in the US.<ref>http://www.osnews.com/story/24954/US_Patent_Expiration_for_MP3_MPEG-2_H_264</ref><ref>http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/MPEG_patent_lists#H.264_patents</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>
 +
 
 +
==Royalty-free "Internet Broadcast" licence==
 +
{{also|MP4}}
 +
 
 +
In August 2010, MPEG LA announced that they would not use their patents against people distributing video non-commercially over the Internet via their "Internet Broadcast" licence.<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>
 +
 
 +
The text of the 2010 licence is not publicly available, but an older version from 2002 has been published by the [[FSF]]:
 +
* [http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/h264-patent-license.pdf PDF scans], [https://static.fsf.org/nosvn/h264-patent-license.txt text version] (and a [http://twkozlowski.net/files/h264-patent-license.htm HTML version] by Tomasz W. Kozlowski)
 +
When Wikipedia was debating whether to allow use of the MP4 format under this licence, their Deputy General Counsel said that the 2002 version was "quite similar" to the 2010, and he used the 2002 version in his explanations without ever noting that anything was different in the 2010 version, so it's likely they are very similar.  A lot of useful information about this licence can be found in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video Wikipedia's MP4 RFC].
 +
 
 +
==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.
 +
 
 +
LSI Corporation (formerly LSI Logic Corporation) withdrew from MPEG LA on 15 July 2007.  The patent US7,020,200 had been part of the "''AVC Patent Licensing Program''".<ref>http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/documents/avc-att1.pdf</ref>
 +
 
 +
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]]

Revision as of 10:58, 2 February 2015

(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 (346 in the USA alone[1]), held by 29 companies[2] divided between 57 countries which they claim are necessary to implement MPEG video formats.[3]

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.[4] 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).[5] The last MPEG LA listed patents don't expire until 2027 in the US.[6][7]

As of February 2010, MPEG LA lists 639 companies which are paying this patent tax.[8]

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.[9]

MPEG LA's patent aggression

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.[10]

Royalty-free "Internet Broadcast" licence

See also: MP4

In August 2010, MPEG LA announced that they would not use their patents against people distributing video non-commercially over the Internet via their "Internet Broadcast" licence.[11][12]

However, this does not permit the distribution of software to play or create videos,[13] and would not apply to a webpage with ads.[14]

The text of the 2010 licence is not publicly available, but an older version from 2002 has been published by the FSF:

When Wikipedia was debating whether to allow use of the MP4 format under this licence, their Deputy General Counsel said that the 2002 version was "quite similar" to the 2010, and he used the 2002 version in his explanations without ever noting that anything was different in the 2010 version, so it's likely they are very similar. A lot of useful information about this licence can be found in Wikipedia's MP4 RFC.

MPEG LA isn't the only group you have to pay

AT&T[15] and Philips[16], both claim to have further patents required for implementations of MPEG video.

LSI Corporation (formerly LSI Logic Corporation) withdrew from MPEG LA on 15 July 2007. The patent US7,020,200 had been part of the "AVC Patent Licensing Program".[17]

It is also possible that other patent holders are preparing a patent ambush.

Avoiding H.264

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[1]. The 1988 spec had parts that were not defined. The 1990 H.261 spec filled in these parts[2].

Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

mpegla.com

References

  1. I counted on 23 May 2012
  2. http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/
  3. http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/226/n-10-02-02.pdf
  4. http://lwn.net/Articles/371751/
  5. http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/28/n_03-11-17_avc.html
  6. http://www.osnews.com/story/24954/US_Patent_Expiration_for_MP3_MPEG-2_H_264
  7. http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/MPEG_patent_lists#H.264_patents
  8. http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/M4V/Pages/Licensees.aspx
  9. 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
  10. "Google open video codec may face patent clash". http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/21/mpegla_mulls_patent_license_for_webm/. "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." 
  11. http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/231/n-10-08-26.pdf
  12. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20100825006629/en
  13. http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/simon-says/2010/08/hold-the-h264-celebrations/index.htm
  14. http://www.osnews.com/story/23735/MPEG-LA_Makes_Free_Internet_Video_Royalty_Free_Perpetually
  15. http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/04/know-your-rights-h-264-patent-licensing-and-you/
  16. http://ipgeek.blogspot.com/2007/02/you-thought-paying-sisvel-ended-your.html
  17. http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/documents/avc-att1.pdf