[M4IF Discuss] MPEG-2, MPEG-4 Patent License Pools Questioned

[Craig Birkmaier]

Please do not re-distribute the following story from Warren 
Publishing. They are very sensitive about IPR issues. I am posting 
the story here because of the relevance to these discussions.
Craig Birkmaier
Pcube Labs
MPEG-2, MPEG-4 Patent License Pools Questioned
March 18, 2024 12:00am
Source: Warren Publishing
WASHINGTON INTERNET DAILY via NewsEdge Corporation : The Justice 
Dept. should withdraw its approval of the patent- sharing pool for 
the MPEG-2 video compression system because MPEG LA is abusing its 
patent licensing for the MPEG-4 compression system for streaming 
video over the Internet, On2 Technologies said in a letter to the 
DoJ. Douglas McIntyre, CEO of the N.Y.- based codec maker, said in 
the letter that the MPEG patent licensing group was using its market 
power to impose an "unprecedented" per-min. licensing fee for use of 
MPEG-4. The Justice Dept. had no immediate comment, but Garrard 
Beeney, an attorney for MPEG LA, said McIntyre was "clearly wrong on 
the facts and the law" because there was no connection between the 2 
pools.
Justice should rescind its 1997 antitrust review letter for the 
MPEG-2 licensing pool and compel MPEG LA participants to act as 
individual entities in MPEG licensing, McIntyre said. MPEG-2 includes 
all the major patents for video compression used for DTV, DBS, DVD 
and other digital video transmissions. McIntyre said the patents 
covered at least 95% of market for digital video. The follow-on 
MPEG-4 pool includes the patents of 18 companies for compression of 
streaming video, although other firms such as RealNetworks have 
competing technologies.
MPEG LA is "attempting to use [MPEG-2] monopoly to ram unreasonable 
fees down the throats of consumers and businesses that use the 
Internet or Internet-related protocols for the delivery of video," 
McIntyre said. However, MPEG LA officials said there was no 
connection between the MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 patent pools, and the letter 
showed no links, such as offering packaged access to patents.
The MPEG-4 license fee structure announced in Jan. has a lower fee 
per coder or decoder, but includes a fee amounting to about 2 cents 
per hour for each video stream transmitted over the Internet. The fee 
would be paid by the entities that disseminated MPEG-4 video, and 
some content providers have criticized the need for record-keeping. 
McIntyre said Justice Dept. guidelines required that the patent pool 
provide some benefit to the market in order to be approved: "The only 
constituency that the MPEG LA patent pool appears to be benefiting is 
MPEG LA." However, Beeney said the letter reflected "a complete 
misunderstanding of the government rationale for approving the patent 
pool."
Denver-based MPEG LA hasn't decided whether to seek a Justice Dept. 
letter approving the MPEG-4 licensing pool, Beeney said. The 
decision, which is likely in May, will be based on whether the terms 
and conditions of MPEG-4 pool are so similar to that of the MPEG-2 
pool and 2 other MPEG LA pools that there's no need for a separate 
approval, he said. Although the terms and conditions may be similar, 
Beeney said there was less similarity between MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 than 
might be expected in the intellectual property that's being pooled. 
Only some of the licensors are the same, he said. -- Michael Feazel
<< Copyright ©2002 Warren Publishing >>