This may help explain the absurdly complex MPEG4 licensing model: http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/M4V/Documents/m4vweb.pdf
On 7/24/2017 3:54 AM, Tiemo Hollmann TB via use-livecode wrote: > Last year I asked Sorenson media if I have to pay license fees, using the > h.264 codec and got the following answer from Sorenson: > "No, you do not need to pay any license fees to use any codecs included in > Squeeze. Sorenson Media pays any license fees necessary for all the codecs > contained in Squeeze. Once you have encoded your video with a licensed > product, like Squeeze, you will never need to pay any licensing fees again." > I assume that’s the same using other compressing tools > Tiemo > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] Im Auftrag > von Colin Holgate via use-livecode > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 19. Juli 2017 21:58 > An: How to use LiveCode <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> > Cc: Colin Holgate <colinholg...@gmail.com> > Betreff: Re: [OT]h.264 alternatives > > Are you sure that a license is needed for H.264 playback? That could > seriously impact the viability of YouTube or Vimeo, if all users had to pay a > license fee. > > My hope is that the license is just paid by the encoder tool maker. If you’re > using Adobe Media Encoder you don’t have to pay a license, Adobe already did. > > In the hope that playback doesn’t involve paying a fee, you could use > non-H.264 encoders that make videos that are played back by anything that can > handle H.264. That might allow you to use your own tool without a license > fee, and still make videos that can play back everywhere. > > Here is an article that talks about how to solve a gamma/contrast issue that > happens with most H.264 encoders: > > https://myth.li/2010/07/how-to-fix-the-h264-gamma-brightness-bug-in-quicktime/ > > The solution they have is to use an x264 encoder, and the article has links > to a QuickTime component, so that you could export to x264 from anything that > uses QuickTime. The results are better looking than regular H.264. > >> On Jul 19, 2017, at 12:37 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode >> <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: >> >> Seems most folks use h.264 for encoding video, but being patent-encumbered >> it requires negotiating a license with MPEGLA for commercial use. >> > > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > > > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
