Cisco Working On Next-Generation Royalty-Free 'Thor' Video Codec

Status
Not open for further replies.

zanny

Distinguished
Jul 18, 2008
214
0
18,680
0
You can actually already use dalaa if you go download it. Its in a workable state. It just isn't as optimized as they want it before their 1.0, and it is also ABI unstable.
 

tom10167

Honorable
Apr 9, 2014
121
1
10,685
0
who pays for these codec things, and when? Like if I convert a video to h.264 am I supposed to be paying somebody? Sorry for the dumb questions.
 

Achoo22

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2011
350
2
18,780
0
Whatever they add, it should be without DRM. Either publish your video on the web for people to digest in the way they feel best or don't, but don't try to control the way my PC handles downloading/streaming/displaying/etc. Honestly, I'd prefer a text-only web to one filled with videos that I may potentially not even be able to pause/rewind/skip etc.
 

Achoo22

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2011
350
2
18,780
0
who pays for these codec things, and when? Like if I convert a video to h.264 am I supposed to be paying somebody? Sorry for the dumb questions.
AFAIK, it doesn't affect you unless you're creating encoders or decoders. This is why Windows may not play DVD/BluRay natively and why your Linux distro might require you to download third-party codecs in a separate, annoying way. Nobody wants to foot the bill. And, honestly, with so many quality codecs available for free there isn't much reason for it.
 

Christopher1

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2006
663
2
19,015
5
How about we just declare that HEVC is a de-facto standard and make it "Have to issue licenses at reasonable rate!".3 cents per copy sold sounds reasonable to me.
 

Christopher1

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2006
663
2
19,015
5
who pays for these codec things, and when? Like if I convert a video to h.264 am I supposed to be paying somebody? Sorry for the dumb questions.
AFAIK, it doesn't affect you unless you're creating encoders or decoders. This is why Windows may not play DVD/BluRay natively and why your Linux distro might require you to download third-party codecs in a separate, annoying way. Nobody wants to foot the bill. And, honestly, with so many quality codecs available for free there isn't much reason for it.
Quality? Nothing beats h.265 for HD quality content at the moment, even though it is not hardware accelerated on most systems as of yet.
 

kenjitamura

Distinguished
Jan 3, 2012
195
3
18,695
1
A group of patent owners for h.265 have banded together and are going to start extracting royalty payments so this Thor codec will be sorely needed.

"HEVC Advance wants 0.5% of content owners attributable gross revenue for each HEVC Video type. To put in perspective how unjust and unfair their licensing terms are, they want 0.5% of Netflix, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and every other content owner/distributor’s revenue, as it pertains to HEVC usage. Considering that most content owners and distributors plan to convert all of their videos over time to use the new High Efficiency Video Coding compression standard, companies like Facebook, Netflix and others would have to pay over $100M a year in licensing payments."
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
3,078
106
20,970
2
How about we just declare that HEVC is a de-facto standard and make it "Have to issue licenses at reasonable rate!".3 cents per copy sold sounds reasonable to me.
Quality? Nothing beats h.265 for HD quality content at the moment, even though it is not hardware accelerated on most systems as of yet.
Agreed, HEVC is great, just need to get costs under control.

A group of patent owners for h.265 have banded together and are going to start extracting royalty payments so this Thor codec will be sorely needed.

"HEVC Advance wants 0.5% of content owners attributable gross revenue for each HEVC Video type. To put in perspective how unjust and unfair their licensing terms are, they want 0.5% of Netflix, Apple, Facebook, Amazon and every other content owner/distributor’s revenue, as it pertains to HEVC usage. Considering that most content owners and distributors plan to convert all of their videos over time to use the new High Efficiency Video Coding compression standard, companies like Facebook, Netflix and others would have to pay over $100M a year in licensing payments."
To be fair Zuckerberg could probably POOP $100M. But even so the price is too high. Maybe instead of .5, .05? It would save these companies a lot of money in terms of bandwidth, which may offset a more reasonable licensing structure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS