On 10/31/2013 08:02 AM, Lukas Benedix wrote:
Maybe you want to read this article:
http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/61927.html
lbenedix
Thanks for the pointer. I somewhat understand where he is coming from.
However, it is still disappointing. "Open source projects get licensed
(if partial and restricted) access to H.264" does not really ring true
to me. Apparently the founder of Xiph now considers H.264
unavoidable/essential functionality (that seems to be what he means by
"we're taking it"), at least for now.
But if your software requires downloading a binary blob for key
functionality, it's not really open source. This also really
illustrates why open standards and open source are better. Weird
workarounds like downloading codecs at runtime are not needed for open
standards.
The fact that the Cisco codec is open source is irrelevant, since if you
build it yourself, the patent license does not apply.
Speaking only for myself,
Matt Flaschen
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
