●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load All Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
bySuperKendall ( 25149 ) writes:
You can use a single block of HTML below to provide video for everyone using the new tag:
Video For Everybody [camendesign.com]
It works on older browsers too, falling back on built in players or even flash if it has to. You simply provide it one .mp4, and one .ogg file and it uses which is best.
Don't let this bickering stop everyone from moving to the video tag as soon as possible, which may then see further solution on a final standard.
I have to say though, the hardware support aspect to me makes h.264 support a must. I al
byTweenk ( 1274968 ) writes:
Mozilla really needs to support this de-facto standard for video (it's not just Apple using this in hardware).
This is actually possible if we make two versions of Firefox: one for the entire world, which does H.264, and an US legal shithole-only version, which doesn't. The version served to the visitor of getfirefox.com would be determined by a Geo-IP query. I have no idea why Ubuntu doesn't do the same, so that all people NOT living in the US might get DVD playback out of the box.
byTheTurtlesMoves ( 1442727 ) writes:
Its not just the US. Even in the EU they grant software patents. No one has enforced or tried to enforce them yet. But its not a given you would win a court case based on a "software only" defense.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byTweenk ( 1274968 ) writes:
EPO may issue software-only patents, but they are meaningless. They interpret the EPC differently from the member states, and essentially they think that "a computer program for X" is not patentable, but "using a computer program to do X" is. Member states think that both are equally unpatentable and will refuse to enforce a software-only patent. It's not that nobody tried to enforce them: they just cannot be enforced.
I can only speak with certainty for my country (Poland) and I'm 100% sure that all softwar
byTweenk ( 1274968 ) writes:
Before somebody throws Wikipedia at me: the fact is that you have exactly zero chance of being prosecuted for using x264 in a computer program without paying a patent license fee in the EU.
byTheTurtlesMoves ( 1442727 ) writes:
Did you get legal advice on that? I did and they lawyers I paid for do not agree.
Even if you are giving away software, the best they would say is you are probably ok and even if it went to court would *probably* only get an injunction rather than a fine.
However they said they put no stock on safety from liability if your software is commercial.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
-- Roy Santoro
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...