Logo Logo
/// 
Die Sache mit dem H.264-Codec

The thing with the H.264 codec



Frage von sachs:
Mai 2010

OSNews is currently running at a Diskussion über das Lizenztheater um den H264.
Was der Artikel anspricht, tauchte AFAIR synonymous schon mal in einem Slashcam-Test auf, um eine Panasonic ging's da.

rate:
Diskussion über das Lizenztheater um den H264.
Was der Artikel anspricht, tauchte AFAIR synonymous schon mal in einem Slashcam-Test auf, um eine Panasonic ging's da.

ALL modern video cameras and camcorders that shoot in h.264 or mpeg2, come with a license agreement that says that you can only use that camera to shoot video for "personal use and non-commercial" purposes
Diskussion über das Lizenztheater um den H264.
Was der Artikel anspricht, tauchte AFAIR synonymous schon mal in einem Slashcam-Test auf, um eine Panasonic ging's da.



One of the commentators then once in the manual his soft looked NLE - Vegas - synonymous there's a clause.

In Heise's synonymous a



Antwort von WoWu:

Hello sachs.
It can be argued admirably indeed.
It is based on the actual "danger" not sure of MPEGLA, but rather of a non-vanishing breed of lawyers who see their right to exist in Sent of warnings.
MPEGLA it's not a question anyone with a hobby website or a blog, for the use of H.264, the money is withdrawn from the pocket.
It is rather in the marketing of the use of a commercial nature.
For your description broadcast would only "internet" in question because the operator generates revenue.
Quote:
"AVC video that is delivered via the Worldwide Web to s.end user for which the end user does not pay remuneration for the right to receive or view."

Quote:
Content encoded, distributed, and viewed by end users is subject to the participation fee, even if the viewership is advertising-or sponsorship-driven

In other words, if advertising is done with it and Money is earned it, it is not free. If it is a private nature and not used to purchase, no charge.
By the end of the year you are there but free anyway:
Quote:
("There will be no royalty during the first-term of the License (ending December 31, 2015)")

Cold comfort ..
But that was in MPEG2 is quite right.

As for the other codecs, it's just a matter of time and got to the holders of the original patents for patent infringement complaints by.
For example, it was Microsoft's VC1 so that was launched immediately after the disclosure of specifications (2005) a license pool and had been reported within a day the first 12 companies, the claims presented.
If today codecs and re-engineered to be spread successfully, will quickly show where the original patents have been violated.
Today codecs not written of individual companies.
On H.264 hold more than 1,300 companies patents.



Antwort von sachs:

Quote:
In other words, if advertising is done with it and Money is earned it, it is not free. If it is a private nature and not used to purchase, no charge.

That's the point to me.
Example Youtube. The write to you for quite some time, if you do not want to advertise on if your video / clip has reached a certain number of click and - of course - meets the guidelines of this partner program.
What rumkommt here, although you can not really call the acquisition, but a Klecker amount is already in, I suppose.

The joke is that in the video in question not once a camcorder was used. There are tutorials and testing of software synthesizers, recorded with a screen recorder. Now we want to make synonymous Videos of hardware equipment and embed the music in a commercial blog.

Quote:
By the end of the year you are there but free anyway

And then we have to throw the things to be safe, because some lawyers might run amok? Somehow rather disillusioning.

In the comments at OSNews gave some people from several EU countries (including Germany to remember) that had all because of the other patents in Europe is no concern. Maybe there's some point at YT 'ne message such as "This video is not available in the U.S., because Europe has been encoded with the H.264!"
:)








Antwort von sachs:

Quote:
On H.264 hold more than 1,300 companies patents.

Amazing how a few of those involved s.diesem Patent Pool:
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensors.aspx

Equally surprising that Canon does not appear to be the licensees or heard encoders to:
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/AVC/Pages/Licensees.aspx
Or, the list has no claim to completeness?



Antwort von WoWu:

The list of companies is already ok, but some have just only one contributed Patent (Apple) and others just a whole "bunch", so Panasonic has 377 patents, 82 are synonymous with Fraunhofer or good about it.
I wanted to say synonymous only that for a happy (-inspired) codec is probably pretty difficult to not have violated any of the 1,300 patents in any way.

But as for Youtube, because you could possibly say that it is a "Title-by-Title" search is and there is less than 12 minutes each license.
Maybe that is a "bright spot". Anyway, I think that such platforms to build and pay no licenses. The only question is how such a product is referred to when it arrives from the camera.
If only SDI output and a free codec RAW. :-) (There's the fact)?

But if I paid 800 times the users take .... Man Man. Now, not everyone pay the $ 5 million cap amount in the year but is still a little sum erklägliches it out ....



Antwort von sachs:

That with the 12min. is definitely a bright spot. YT allowed only 10 minutes anyway. - And much longer look at tutorials / tests anyway, no one focuses on.

Somehow I find the subject more exciting. Panasonic is because with 377 patents inside, however, Canon is no work here even though the devices with AVCHD.
Maybe I should choose between the SD600 (I actually wanted to wait) and make a potential competitor Canon-dependent. :)



Antwort von WoWu:

Now, Canon has never been the real software company. But against the background of the payer and the recipient can understand sometimes synonymous, why are some companies opt for new codecs and other still hold dear s.alten codecs. MPEG2 for example, is very cheap now and JPEG costs almost nothing because most of the patents were not renewed.
Other companies are trying just for specific markets for which is not worth such a Mengendecklung come with their own "house codecs" through.
Understand you can (I, anyway) but synonymous, why not simply implement NLE's just time the whole range of available codecs.
Most consumers do not know how many are in favor of the Manufacturer and must actually spend quite disappointed, since only a few who are in codecs. I find a codec enough, but which is implemented super.
I would also like to do without the forced codec of the camera, if I could go out for SDI on a flash recorder with the codec of my choice.
As already said in another thread: The lens manufacturer provide the "glass" including RAW image sensor with out or with 2.2 gamma, making the camera head (only) the handling, the sound and the metadata and the codec of the Flash Recorder and recording. That's about it.



Antwort von sachs:

Well, I thought, Canon set to None Page, not synonymous, as a licensee. Does that mean that the use of these "house codecs" or is the licensee list simply incomplete. In the phone book secret codes are not synonymous (listed Comparison stupid).



Antwort von WoWu:

That is so 'n Ding ... I see now synonymous for the first time
Perhaps the update of the list is not so new? Pure conjecture, another explanation I would not now synonymous for it.
No, with house codec were really such things as AIC or ProRes, but it is synonymous DIRAC or some others who z.Tl. (Put synonymous) to become royalty basic algorithms.
No, no, Canon is already pure AVC 77, therefore, Main Profile.




Antworten zu ähnlichen Fragen:
h.264 codec problems
H.264 codec playback jerky, or how it is going smoothly
The thing with the H.264 codec
H.264 Codec
H.264 codec
H.264 / H265 Codec in Da Vinci Resolve
Trent + Alan: Neue Einbeinstative mit 2m Länge oder 60Kg Kapazität von 3 legged Thing
AVI-Datei mit Indeo Video 4.4-Codec in anderen Codec umwandeln
h.264 Bitrate
PP2020 - h.264 Export
H.264 für Linux
HEVC vs. H.264 Dateigröße
h.264 or mpeg 4 or 263
H.264 TV Aufnahmen eindampfen
H.264 ruckelt bei Wiedergabe
Edius 9.4 keine H.264 400Mbit/s.
Umrechnungsfaktor Bitrate MPEG2 -> H.264?
H.264 --> als DVD brennen
Welche sinnvolle H.264 DirectShow-Komponente?
h.265 statt h.264 - Lohnt es sich?
DavinciResolve H.265/264 NVIDIA allgemeineFragen
Seltsame Bildfehler im unteren Drittel bei H.264
MPEG-4 H.264 mit einer DVB-C Karte
Vidiu Teradek X: Kompakter Streaming H.264-Encoder
Warum ist h.265 "heller" als h.264?
Externer Rekorder für 4K H.264/265 10Bit?

















weitere Themen:
Spezialthemen


16:9
AI
ARD
AVCHD
AVI
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
After effects
Apple Final Cut Pro
Audio
Avid
Avid Media Composer
Cam
Camcorder
Camera
Canon
Capture
Capturing
Clip
EOS
Editing
Effect
Error
Export
File
Files
Film
Final Cut
Format
Formate
HDR
Import
JVC
KI
Layer
Light
MAGIX video deLuxe
Magix
Microphone
Monitor
Movie
PC
Panasonic
Pinnacle
Pinnacle Studio
Player
Premiere
RAM
RED
Recording
Red
Software
Sony
Sound
Studio
TV
Tape
Video
Videos