HTML 5 ditches native video support

Well at least with IMG you can pick JPEG and expect it to work reasonably well between all browsers. I think Ogg Theora should be at least a baseline codec. Basically Apple derailed HTML video in a way by refusing to implement Theora.

Mozilla doesn't own the full copyright to the Firefox codebase. They must follow the license like anyone else, or risk being sued for copyright infringement.

Besides the objections to H.264 are not purely ideological. For a web browser licensing H.264 goes up to five million dollars PER year. It's a very expensive codec.

Edit: Off by a multiple. Still frecken expensive.

I don't think you can expect the W3C to say "if you want to implement HTML5, you better have $5 million per year in disposable income". I think the point is to offer wide implementation of web standardsin entities big and small.

Another any interesting thing about the license fees, the $5 million per year cap only applies in 2010. MPEG LA reserves the right to raise this license fee in future years. Also, MPEG LA doesn't currently charge for websites serving H.264 content, but they will begin charging license fees for this in 2010. Meaning if you have a website that servs up H.264 (channel 9?) you will have to get a separate license. They haven't decided how much they will charge. But chances are, as with everything MPEG LA apparently, this won't be inexpensive. This could affect tens of thousands of businesses and individuals, and many more if HTML5 used H.264 exclusively.

Basically I view H.264 is useless as a video format for all but the biggest conglomerates who make billions of dollars and quickly hit the royalty cap, which as of now $5 mill is still petty cash for them. Notice that's why Apple and Google can live with H.264, they are both huge companies who use H.264 all over the place and probably pay the flat fee and are done with it. Apple also receives royalties from the MPEG LA, so they have a vested interest in the format.

If H.264 starts getting more adoption, and basically even medium sized companies will require to buy expensive licenses to H.264 to be competitive. If people become "addicted" to H.264, suddenly, MPEG LA more incentive to raise their license fees to almost a government income tax type level.

It could basically ruin the Internet, hurt mostly small business and individuals, which so far thrived on Internet IMO because it's an open access medium unlike TV.

Well Youtube is owned by Google. Google makes billions of dollars. Google can afford H.264.

But what about everyone ELSE who wants to use H.264? Why should implementing HTML suddenly cost money? Does "the Internet" now how to be a licensee of MPEG LA, if they want to use HTML5 video, or hell even Flash?

Did you know that if you use Flash client and you are a business, you must get a license from MPEG LA? Flash's H.264 is not licensed for commerical use at all! This is both client and server (decoding and encoding video). Just because MPEG LA hasn't sued the millions of businesses that are probably in violation of this right now, doesn't mean they won't later.

I don't know what the hell you are implying. "Certain browser manufacturers", "certain of the vendors", can you please define who/what the hell you are ranting about? It would be kind of helpful.