Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

VP8 went from (according to the MPEG-LA and its proponents) legally dangerous to a better option (at least legally) than H.264, covering more users and more usage scenarios (namely, not just non-commercial, but commercial too), and for free to users, to boot.

So yes, VP8 (and thus Google) won.



That's like saying someone claimed they didn't order something at a restaurant while the restaurant claimed they did. The person pays anyway and the restaurant is happy and they don't get in trouble. Did the person win? Google has claimed for a long time VP8 was clear of patents. This is them giving up.


The analogy breaks down when the agreement applies not only to Google, but also everyone else using VP8/9.

So yeah, Google may have paid the restaurant for their meal but now everyone else who goes to that restaurant and orders the same thing now gets it for free.

If you're hungry, I'd recommend ordering what Google ordered and eating for free.


Doesn't it depend on how much they paid? If the person paid for much less than the restaurant was asking and/or for less than a court case would cost, I'd say they won. And as long as the size of Google's MPEG-LA payment isn't visible in their next earnings report (remember the MPEG-LA was claiming hundreds of millions of willful infringements), I'd say Google won, too.


> Doesn't it depend on how much they paid? If the person paid for much less than the restaurant was asking and/or for less than a court case would cost, I'd say they won.

I guess that's a matter of opinion then.

Because if the person really didn't order (or receive) any meal, and they still had to pay anything to clear up matters, I wouldn't say they won. At most I'd say they got off relatively well, considering circumstances. The restaurant, however, getting any money for a meal they didn't make, is a clear winner.

On the other hand (and I'm not sure how/if this holds up in the analogy because I'm not entirely clear about what's going on with the Google/MPEG-LA thing) if the restaurant did prepare the meal they claim the person ordered (but who didn't), assuming they got less than the costs of the meal, both are losers. Which figures because miscommunication often lead to waste.


As much as I wish this were the case and admire VP8 as you do, I don't think this is really true yet:

>covering more users and more usage scenarios

given that I'm not aware of any phone, set top box, AV accessory, etc that supports VP8 accelerated decoding.


From the list http://wiki.webmproject.org/hardware/arm-socs I would say some devices on the market should already support hw vp8 decoding.


Hm. I'd love to be wrong, I'll try some of them when I get home with my webm videos.


From http://wiki.webmproject.org/hardware/devices it looks like that the raspberry pi support hw decoding (edit: but maybe it's not supported at the driver level...)


Ah, looks like the only thing I'd have off that list is the Samsung Nexus 10 and it's packed away in a box. I presume it being on that list means it works, still a pretty tiny fraction. I'm sure that will grow, especially after this good news.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: