On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Aryeh Gregor <simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com<simetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com> > wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Brian<brian.min...@colorado.edu> wrote: > > It's a shame they couldn't get all vendors to agree to ship both ogg and > > h264 codecs. > > No, it's not. H.264 is patented and you need to pay licensing fees to > use it. It's not an open standard and should not be used on the web > if it's at all avoidable. It's possible Mozilla couldn't even legally > ship it, at least if they continue to distribute under the GPL. > (Maybe if they distributed only as LGPL/MPL they could avoid any > issues by making the H.264 part BSD-licensed or something.) > A compromise is a win-win. In the absence of a compromise its a lose-lose. Except that H264 wins since almost all of us already support it. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
