Sabrina Kilian wrote:
> For the most part, I think they are right. The patents are in coding and
> decoding, and patent infringement does not extend to the end user.

Well, it's the end user doing the decoding. And if I upload an h.264 video 
to a host and that host distributes it, the host isn't doing encoding or 
decoding any more than the routers are. So while this may be business as 
usual, it doesn't sound like the legal system has figured out the reality of 
the situation yet.

> If the video encoder
> paid their license and the video player did as well, should they finally
> be asked to, then the video host should not be liable.

That would be my guess, yes, but this is the legal system we're talking about.

And what happens if the video transcoding is hosted where there's no 
software patents? Does that make it clear to send that encoded video back to 
the USA?

I don't think it's quite as clear-cut as either side makes it seem. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
   open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.

Post a reply to this message