Safari hasn’t chosen it as the default, it’s chosen it as the solitary option. If they’d integrated Theora then every single browser that supports the <video> tag would also support Theora and the argument would be moot.
Safari hasn’t chosen it as the default, it’s chosen it as the solitary option.
Not true. They've chosen to implement it in a codec-agnostic way. It simply requires installing XiphQT, which itself only involves moving a file into a folder. This is unlike (say) Mozilla, to which <video> support of h.264 cannot be added by any means.
You could argue that Apple have made it the solitary option on their mobile devices, but that's because it depends on the availability of hardware decoder support, which doesn't exist for Theora.
and the argument would be moot.
No, the argument would shift over to trying to get content creators to use Theora, even though 70% or so of the browsing audience doesn't support it or <video>. Web video would still be dominated by h.264 in Flash, the only format that would work everywhere.
My understanding is that Apple and Google cannot use Theora because they are targets for patent trolls, and would be sued by a multitude of companies claiming to hold patents that cover Theora.
correction: It's just Apple/Safari that does not support Theora, not Google/Chrome, which does.
That's a red herring. Precisely the same wording could be used for any software publisher and any algorithm. Even with H.264, the fact that you're paying one patent holder does not preclude other patent holders suing you for other parts of your software. You could just as easily say, "My understanding is that nobody with deep pockets can distribute any software because patent trolls might show up."
Yes, that's right, to a degree. The amount of software patent litigation that exists now is absurd.
The reason H.264 is more secure for Apple and Google is that the technology is already covered by an existing patent, which is licensed out by the holder. If someone wished to claim ownership over technologies covered by H.264, they would have to go up against MPEG/MPEG LA and many others.
With Theora, as far as I know, the burden for legal defense would fall on whoever is using it, namely Apple and Google. The situation is ridiculous, but there you go.
That patent protection theory is wrong since Theora is "already covered by an existing patent, which is licensed out by the holder".
One of the avenues Apple was exploring in order to discount Theora was checking whether the Theora patent licence applied to independent implementations or just the xiph version.
Google made that point moot by buying the original patent owner.
