On Thu, 08 Sep 2005, Andrew Suffield wrote: > The MPEG-LA claims to hold all the patents applicable to MPEG, and > that all these patents are valid, but since it's impossible for them > to know either of these things they are obviously lying.
They don't claim to do this at all.[1] All they say is that they can license this set of patents on behalf of the patent holders which they feel are essential for MPEG-4, that they're trying to "provide worldwide access to as much MPEG-4 Visual essential intellectual property as possible; new Licensors and essential patents may be added at no additional royalty during the current term"[2] Indeed, they don't even hold the patents *at all*. > It's never been seriously tested in court. What's to test? It's just method of licensing a slew of patents. Don Armstrong 1: Or at the very least I've never seen this claim in any communication; I haven't bothered to request a copy of the license agreement though. 2: http://www.mpegla.com/m4v/ -- It seems intuitively obvious to me, which means that it might be wrong -- Chris Torek http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
