I'm creating opensource GPL H264 encoding lib/app (based on x264) do I need to pay for the license?

Question

I'm creating opensource GPL H264 encoding lib/app (based on x264) do I need to pay for the license?

Answer 1

Yes, you do, at least in the United States.

Answer 2

MPEG-LA claims the patents they license are necessary to implementing H.264. A summary of their licensing terms doesn't show an obvious exception being made just because some software happens to be free. On the other hand, all of their language talks about codecs that are "sold". My guess is that you'd just about have to get the real license agreement (available via hardcopy only) to come to any solid conclusions.

Answer 3

According to this blog article, the MPEG-LA specifically indicated that license fees are required even for open source software:

In response to your specific question, under the Licenses royalties are paid on all MPEG-4 Visual/AVC products of like functionality, and the Licenses do not make any distinction for products offered for free (whether open source or otherwise)…

However, like many patent-encumbered technologies, the licensing landscape is very complex and confusing (that's what lawyers do), so it's hard to say that a 2nd hand comment from an email sent by someone in the MPEG-LA organization can be considered definitive. If I were writing open source software, I'd probably just shy away from H.264 if at all possible (and maybe rely on system installed codec if that's an option). If I were writing commercial software, I'd definitely get a license, either directly or indirectly by licensing a library from an outfit that had a license.

Sorry to be absolutely no help...

Answer 4

You don't need a license to write source code. MPEG-LA's opinion is that you need one to distribute it.

Answer 5

As a worker in the video compression industry, I can offer my understanding (I am not a layer) that to just operate an H.264 codec legally you need a license.

Whether that is enforcible depends on how public or private you are about operating your codec.

This is the licensing organization's web site: http://www.mpegla.com/main/default.aspx

Certainly if you purchase a commercial codec, say as part of some video editing software, then you've paid for a license. On the other hand, if you've downloaded ffmpeg and you run it without paying anything to anybody you are in violation. If you search out a contact within the licensing oarganization to send a check to, which I don't pretend would be simple, then you could conceivably arrange a license to run ffmpeg.

Whether you can announce and/or distribute a codec you've written without arranging for those who receive your codec to also receive a license is boarderline - clearly the licensing organization wishes you to do make such arrangements. Making an announcement is a public act, so you don't have any protection of privacy. Ffmpeg, on the other hand, gets away with being public and not making any licensing arrangements - however they are A) a project of significant size with many people willing to support it; B) very clear that they consider any onus to be on the user and not on them.