With regard to patents, VP8 copies way too much from H.264 for anyone sane to be comfortable with it, no matter whose word is behind the claim of being patent-free.
Google isn't indemnifying those who might use VP8, right?
Right. As far as I understand, this is untenable legally anyway. The MPEG group has the authority to sue anyone and everyone in violation (including the end user). Google is obviously not offering to pay damages in all of those suites.
> VP8 is definitely better compression-wise than Theora and Dirac, so if its claim to being patent-free does stand up, it’s an upgrade with regard to patent-free video formats.
Sounds to me like he has no clue yet, and how could he if it's just been released?
Down-voted for factual inaccuracy. From the very first paragraph:
>Fortunately, it seems I was able to acquire access to the VP8 spec, software, and source a good few days before the official release and so was able to perform a detailed technical analysis in time for the official release.
The only "clue" he's missing is whether or not VP8 is buried under a flood of patent lawsuits. Since that's something only time will tell, I think it's perfectly reasonable for him to add that qualification to his claim that VP8 is an upgrade from Theora and Dirac.
For all the clueless opinions flying around patents, Jason actually gave technical arguments ... imagine the shock I had to read an insightful technical article, rather than opinions filled with religion or politics.
> sometimes it take year for a single patent
It takes only seconds to issue threats. And a single threat can stop people from adopting it.
With regard to patents, VP8 copies way too much from H.264 for anyone sane to be comfortable with it, no matter whose word is behind the claim of being patent-free.
Google isn't indemnifying those who might use VP8, right?