That, in turn, assumes that MPEG-LA is so stupid as to demand content license fees that drive people to the alternatives. FWIW, when they first proposed content streaming license fees a few years ago (before suspending them to put the issue off), I believe they had a very large grace window, to the effect that like 100,000 individual streams per year would be royalty free. Part of the problem with that is figuring out what a "stream" even is: does one individual watching a piano- playing cat on YouTube merit the same fee as a DirecTV downlink that's watched by millions? Those issues are still being hammered out.
My bet, FWIW: they'll make enough money off big players in broadcast media and leave web content well enough alone. To wit: DirecTV's operating costs are over $4B/year. MPEG-LA demanding millions more for content fees (on top of the encoding and decoding license fees they're already paying), would be less than a rounding error on the balance sheet. --Chris On May 20, 7:58 am, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > It's an uphill battle, but I'm counting on VP8 to attract attention > from the right people; and also see an analogy to GIF vs. PNG - > especially if/when MPEG-LA starts to milk their cash cow in 2016. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
