Firm quietly boosts H.264 streaming license fees from $100,000 up to staggering $4.5 million — backbone codec of the internet gets meteoric increase, AVC hikes follow disastrous H.265 licensing increa

commander@lemmy.world · 4 days ago

Firm quietly boosts H.264 streaming license fees from $100,000 up to staggering $4.5 million — backbone codec of the internet gets meteoric increase, AVC hikes follow disastrous H.265 licensing increa

Cantaloupe@lemmy.fedioasis.cc · 3 days ago

Long Live WebM I guess.

Kairos@lemmy.today · 2 days ago

Webm is just a subset of mkv

Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de · edit-2 3 days ago

webm can contain VP8, VP9 or AV1 video streams. I guess if you mean webm with VP9 inside it could be one solution, though less efficient. Also Google donated VP9 and what they had for VP10 to the development efforts of of AV1, so if AV1 is found to be infringing it’s a negative signal for VP9 too…

Edit: Sorry I was a bit off-topic. I was thinking of the action that Dolby is currently taking against Snapchat for their AV1 use.

WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works · 3 days ago

mkv for the win

VeloRama@feddit.org · 2 days ago

mkv is a container, not a codec

WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works · 2 days ago

same as webm, yes

Firm quietly boosts H.264 streaming license fees from $100,000 up to staggering $4.5 million — backbone codec of the internet gets meteoric increase, AVC hikes follow disastrous H.265 licensing increa

Firm quietly boosts H.264 streaming license fees from $100,000 up to staggering $4.5 million — backbone codec of the internet gets meteoric increase, AVC hikes follow disastrous H.265 licensing increa

Firm quietly boosts H.264 streaming license fees from $100,000 up to staggering $4.5 million — backbone codec of the internet gets meteoric increase, AVC hikes follow disastrous H.265 licensing increases