Google was claiming VP8 didn’t infringe any patents they didn’t own, which apparently wasn’t the case, and now they’re having to backpedal and say, “well, it did infringe them, but we’re covering the licensing.”
VP8 saw little market acceptance because of the legal threats of MPEG-LA (did that consortium ever actual detail specific "infringed" patents? The last I saw they just made blanket statements that there must be something). So Google paid them protection money. By no analysis does this mean that they admit infringing of anything, and such an analysis of legal agreements is woefully naive.
VP8 saw little market acceptance because of the legal threats of MPEG-LA (did that consortium ever actual detail specific "infringed" patents? The last I saw they just made blanket statements that there must be something). So Google paid them protection money. By no analysis does this mean that they admit infringing of anything, and such an analysis of legal agreements is woefully naive.