Without real commitment, WebM will go nowhere

Today I heard a talk from my colleague about video codecs and formats. Of particular interest was the ongoing battle for codec support among popular browsers. Google is fearful of patent licensing around h.264, which is supported by Apple and Microsoft, and is giving WebM away as a free alternative. The problem is that due to the complex nature of video codecs, WebM is likely encumbered by the same patents protecting h.264. Regardless, it’s clear that h.264 with highest quality-to-bitrate ratio is the best performer.

Mainly because it can be played on iOS and played by Flash, I believe h.264 will continue to be the most popular codec and the only way for Google to get adoption is to promise to protect all WebM users that it will indemnify them from any patent litigation. Google would assume the risk and the codec’s users, free of any licensing, can continue building products that use WebM. If Google truly believed that the WebM was clear of any patent issues, it would have already done this, especially considering that they already paid $300mm for On2. Without indemnification from Google, there is too much risk with WebM; at least h.264 has a predictable licensing model.