Printed from

New WebM license group tries to safeguard against lawsuits

updated 02:45 pm EDT, Mon April 25, 2011

WebM Community Cross-License guards video patents

The WebM Project took a defensive measure on Monday with the creation of the WebM Community Cross-License. The approach will see 17 companies and groups give licenses to any WebM-related patents they have to other CCL members. Google, Matroska, and form the core but are joined by AMD, Cisco, Huawei, LG, Logitech, MIPS, Mozilla, Opera, Pantech, Quanta, Samsung, STMicro, TI, and Verisilicon.

The aim is superficially to encourage a "diverse range of contributors" and to foster the concept of WebM, which is free, open-source and theoretically universal.

Its emphasis on patent licensing is nonetheless convenient as it came weeks after the MPEG-LA group began hunting for WebM patent violations to use for a possible lawsuit. Both the video standards body and partners like Apple and Microsoft have argued that WebM may violate patents and require a royalty payment in spite of Google's insistence the format was royalty-free. MPEG-LA has a vested interest in stopping WebM since it stands to lose revenue if companies use WebM and cut out its license revenue.

Critics have pointed out similarities between how H.264 and WebM pack and decode video, but haven't gone so far as to accuse Google and its acquisition On2 Technologies of directly imitating code.

The CCL would nonetheless complicate any possible lawsuit and could be vital for Google now that YouTube is offering WebM. If vulnerable to a lawsuit, YouTube could be responsible for much larger fines or royalty payouts than most through its scale and ad revenue.

By Electronista Staff


  1. macentric

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Sep 2005


    Cross-Licenses huh...

    This sounds an awful lot like the kind of license swaps companies do when avoiding suing each other over patent infringement. IANAL, but this seems a lot like a good justification for the MPEG-LA to pounce based on the idea that the WebM contributors think they have something to protect while sharing with other WebM contributors. It almost implies that there is intellectual property of these contributors involved and that WebM can essentially not be a license free codec.

    The formation of this group might actually be a tacit acknowledgement that there are IP issues with WebM.

  1. WaltFrench

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jun 2003



    Wasn't it just a matter of weeks ago that Google was asserting that WebM didn't involve ANY patents from third parties? And now they're trying to bring them all into their fold?

    Am I missing something, or did the Google Distortion Field presume nobody has a memory of longer than 3 weeks?

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

IDrive cloud backup and sync service

There are a lot of cloud services out there, and nearly all of them can be used for backing up key files and folders. A few dedicated ...

Asus Chromebook C300

When Chromebooks hit the market back in 2011, consumers didn't know what to do with them. The low-cost laptops, powered by Google's Ch ...

Plantronics BackBeat Pro Bluetooth headphones

Looking for a pair of headphones that can do everything a user requires is a task that can take some study. Trying to decide on in-ear ...



Most Commented


Popular News