http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/07/new-patent-group-threatens-to-derail-4k-hevc-video-streaming/ This may cause some problems.
Oh, thought H.264 was a open standard.
It will be bluray all over again only this time it will expand itself to streaming content.
VP8, VP9, Dirac are comparable open standards. Anything MPEG are not.
problem is only that there are already a ton of devices which support h265 and not VP9 or Dalaa.
Well hell, and I was getting really excited for H.265. Especially since PLEX can now transcode it for streaming. Just takes a lot of resources.
Thats the point. Give it to everyone for free, get them hooked then make them pay up.
I also just found out that VP9 actually has hardware acceleration on newer intel chips so theres no reason is cant be used,
You would think the world would get tired of this greedy gouging close source crap.
Most people don't give a damn about it. Ask a 100 people and 99 probably won't even know what you are talking about.
Well Devils advocate here, the people who made the code and created the H.26* codex still have to eat and should receive compensation for their hard work that we all benefit from. I think the whole royalty thing is a terrible way to do i because it stifles adoption from people who can not afford to pay them.
It stiffles adoption which is why they offer it free initially then hit you with it. Not only are they wanting to charge significantly more than other types of media format patents they want to do it retroactively meaning anyone who adopted it already will have to pay back fees since there use.
And its not manufacturers who will brunt the cost since there also going after media distributors that includes things like Netflix who will push the cost back to us.
This is a problem with how we compensate people for labor in society in general.
If we had something akin to a UBI or just guaranteed basic resource distribution then people could just do the shit they wanna do without having to fuck people over in the process just to stay alive. Sure people should be rewarded for innovating, and we can do that without having to resort to trade secrets, patents, and copyright.
Perhaps, but implementation is better if it's offered free and open - cores and standards, like Linux, TCP - hell, even IPvx IDing and infrastructure all follow this concept, many of them (mainly in networking) becoming synonymous worldwide for the sorts of solutions they provide. If you think about it, could we have different solutions in terms of assignment for the IPvx infrastructure? Well, if IPv4 and IPv6 individually are of any indication, yes. However, it would be a hellhole of implementation as server/client software engineers have to work around the issue or not at all.
We have the same issue with Windows, GNU/Linux, BSD, and OSX in terms of software support, or DX and OpenGL/Vulkan for graphics applications, or TressFX and Gameworks, or consolitis for games, etc. The same follows for data codecs. If everyone used the same open codecs for video and audio and compression and whatnot, the level of abstraction would go down for implementation. That can leave the final layer, the software and the drivers and the interfaces, free to customizability and option, and no black boxes of code that screw up the development process.
Does that mean that implementations for FLAC or Linux or Vulkan will never change? No - if anything, it will thrive in development as necessary pieces of code: able to be maintained, modified, or forked as necessary by the developer community at large. Updating more crucial structural pieces will be a real pain (e.g. IPvx) but will be no more difficult than dependency hell.
They already get royalties from every device sold which is capable of h265 playback as done in the original agreement. The point is they want MORE now. It's not that they don't get anything from it. They just want more from it now.