• BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    97
    ·
    11 months ago

    French laws don’t recognize software patents so videolan doesn’t either. This is likely a reference to vlc supporting h265 playback without verifying a license. These days most opensource software pretends that the h265 patents and licensing fees don’t exist for convenience. I believe libavcodec is distributed with support enabled by default.

    Nearly every device with hardware accelerated h265 support has already had the license paid for, so there’s not much point in enforcing it. Only large companies like Microsoft and Red Hat bother.

    • Blaster M@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      They bother because they are US based and can be hounded by the patent trolls holders

      • PupBiru@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        let’s not go too far though… the holders of h264/h265 did put a lot of money and effort into developing the codec: a new actual thing… they are not patent trolls, who by definition produce nothing new other than legal mess

        • Thrashy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          On the other hand, Fraunhofer is obnoxious enough about licensing and enforcement that companies like Google invested similar money and effort into developing open-source codecs just to avoid dealing with them.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          There are good FOSS codecs and there are good proprietary codecs. The latter are being standardized where the former may not, and pushed where they are not needed.

          It’s not a market choice.