Video of the debate
is now up on Youtube.
An irony: I did not wish to watch the video with the Flash-based video player (Flash is proprietary and largely obsolete) , and so I chose to enable the HTML5 video beta (http://www.youtube.com/html5
), which enables me to watch videos with the built-in browser video player. However, it didn't work. Why? Because the HTML5 video Youtube offers is encoded in the H.264 codec, which is encumbered with patents and restrictive terms
. I was trying to watch the video in Firefox, which does not have a decoder for it due to the patents, expensive licence fees, and the developers not wanting to contribute to the patent-encumbered codec becoming the de-facto standard for HTML5 video encoding. So, I was unable to watch a video about patents because of patents. Brilliant.
In retrospect, I should have voiced this problem in response to one of the pro-patent debaters claiming that patents have not negatively affected open source projects. However, that person has made an interesting point later - perhaps all the negative press, ridiculous examples of, and lawsuits around software patents are the minority.(Or perhaps not.) This shows that the laws of software patents cannot be discredited solely based upon individual cases
, but perhaps also through why it's a bad idea anyway