Monty Montgomery - Comments on Cisco, Mozilla, and H.264

Et un commentaire bien mieux informé que moi :
Comments on Cisco, Mozilla, and H.264
▻http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/61927.html

This arrangement has obvious short-term benefits. Open source projects get licensed (if partial and restricted) access to H.264, and users don’t feel like they’re being held hostage in the ongoing battle between the open web and closed codecs. Firefox and other projects can install H.264 support (via Cisco), which is a big deal.

That said, today’s arrangement is at best a stopgap, and it doesn’t change much on the ground. How many people don’t already have H.264 codecs on their machines, legit or otherwise? Enthusiasts and professionals alike have long paid little attention to licensing. Even most businesses today don’t know and don’t care if the codecs they use are properly licensed[1]. The entire codec market has been operating under a kind of ’Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy for the past 15 years and I doubt the MPEG LA minds. It’s helped H.264 become ubiquitous, and the LA can still enforce the brass tacks of the license when it’s to their competitive advantage (or rather, anti-competitive advantage; they’re a legally protected monopoly after all).

#hevc #daala

Mozilla Cisco paie le H.264 en faveur de Mozilla
▻http://linuxfr.org/news/cisco-paie-le-h-264-en-faveur-de-mozilla

Est-ce que cette solution sera universelle pour toutes les plateformes  ? Est-ce vraiment le début de la fin de la diffusion de vidéos par plugin Flash/Silverlight  ?