359
AV1’s open, royalty-free promise in question as Dolby sues Snapchat over codec (arstechnica.com)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
46 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Because they always do, not because they have a legitimate claim.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

    In the US system at least it matters not if your claim is legitimate, the mere fact that you can file it poses a severe risk.

    Patent system needs fixing from the foundations up. Or even better, full abolition.

    In the meantime, what's the better actually open codec to reencode to?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    AV1. Netvc didn't happen, and parts of Daala and Thor were integrated into AV1. Google has the only relevant patents and gave the world an irrevocable license to use it freely.

    This is as close as you can get. The sisvel patent trolls will put their grubby fingers onto everything you can call “video codec”, and make up ways they can milk people stupid enough to pay them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent