Just watching the H.264 video in violation of the patent, you are subject to liability

This afternoon, a blog recording appeared on “ No, you cannot do it with H.264 ”, which says that anyone who owns a video encoding program who creates a video according to H.264 can become a violator of patent law , even if this program is in relation to Copyright is licensed: if a video is created or used for commercial purposes, you must pay the deductions MPEG LA .

But you do not think that if you do not create videos, then MPEG LA will leave all of you (ordinary viewers) alone?

In the current (2010) January, very opportunely, the letter of Allen Harkness (Allen Harkness) was written and became known , which is exactly in MPEG LA as director for global licensing (Director, Global Licensing). Turning to the Internet user who subscribed to the gstreamer decoders mailing list and promised to convey the opinion of MPEG LA in advance, Allen Harkness openly and unequivocally stated that not only suppliers, but also distributors and end users of a video product created with a patent violation, are subject to liability .
')
Here is the exact quote:

If you’re endless product is unlicensed. Therefore, it is not necessary to pay for it. .

The end of the quote.

_{A note about the sources: this letter was completely published over there , and I got there by a hyperlink from a discussion on LOR .}

This is a weighty, this is a real reason to go to Theora with the whole world.

I’ll also say right away that Harkness (like all lawyers) is expressed in incredibly streamlined formulations: you cannot reliably understand whether you mean the product, which is a video codec, or even the product, which is a video.