undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjws16y ago0 comments

I value watching non-crappy video enough to pay $0.20 for an H.264 license.

I value the runtime on my battery operated devices enough to pay $0.20 for an efficiently decoded format.

(Maybe that is more than $0.20. Depending on volume the H.264 is $0.00, $0.20, or $0.10, but I think there is a base license also required that I can't find. In any event, adding H.264 to a computer probably costs less than half a can of beer.)

http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Documents/AVC_TermsS...

And remember, I am still allowed to do anything I want with the code. I just have to give MPEG-LA half a can of beer do it.

0 pointsjws16y ago0 comments

I value watching non-crappy video enough to pay $0.20 for an H.264 license.

I value the runtime on my battery operated devices enough to pay $0.20 for an efficiently decoded format.

http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Documents/AVC_TermsS...

And remember, I am still allowed to do anything I want with the code. I just have to give MPEG-LA half a can of beer do it.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

Sanguinez16y ago· 2 in thread

So it looks like your value your freedom to $0.20.

"And remember, I am still allowed to do anything I want with the code. I just have to give MPEG-LA half a can of beer do it." Then free software would'nt be ablo to be free software. You cannot preserve freedom this way.

ez7716y ago

You mean software freedom, I guess. Personal freedom is greater with BSD than GPL, and with public-domain software than with any of them. Personal freedom includes the right to sell software at $0.20 or $200, and the customer's right to buy it or not. For the record, I'm against software patents, but also against being forced to publish one's code, which incidentally maximizes personal freedom.

Sanguinez16y ago

Yes I mean software freedom. Well, free software (whether it is GNU/GPL or BSD-like) allow you to sell it. But how could it remain free (as in freedom) if redistribution has strings attached?

2 more replies

sandGorgon16y ago

+1 I think google would happily subsidize the cost of H.264 end-user licenses for the 100 million or so unique visitors that it had in Jan 2009.

But I think it is going to be cheaper for them to spend a 100 million or so and buy out a top-end video codec developer and release the codec as open source.... or did they ?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse