[MPlayer-users] Re: Quicktime: "No 'moov' atom could be found"

[Ken]

Jonathan Rogers wrote:
> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]
> Ken wrote:
> 
>> The only thing that makes me hestitant to condone MPEG4 is their 
>> licensing 'fees'. And yes its container is more complicated than AVI, 
>> but thats because of its Object container support - this turns out to 
>> be REALLY cool though since ancillary data and media can be carried 
>> with the file (captions, images, files, chapter lists, etc.).
> 
> 
> The MPEG-4 licensing is a big problem for Free Software, at least for 
> commercial use. I'm not even sure if I'm safe using it privately; I 
> might be violating patents every time I use mencoder with libavcodec. Do 
> you know if licenses are required for the container as well as the 
> codecs? 

Wow!!! Thats a really good question! My guess is NO, only because its 
closely related to Quicktimes container, which is free. But guesses by 
non-lawyers can be risky. :) If yes, then just using quicktimes 
conatiner seems like a workaraound - but there goes interop!!

I honestly dont know how the per-content licensing scheme is supposed to 
be dealt with by folks who opt too use DIVX - they dont mention much of 
the 'duties' on their site, curiously. Is divx content exempt, or just 
not Mpeg4??? :)

If so, that's a very good reason to avoid it. If not, it could
> be a good container to use, even if Vorbis, VP3, Theora or Tarkin were 
> used in place of MPEG-4 video and audio. I've already seen Quicktime 
> videos with MPEG-4 video and Vorbis audio. VP3 can be put in several 
> containers, including Quicktime.
> 
> Jonathan Rogers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RTFM!!!  http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu/DOCS
> Search:  http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu/cgi-bin/htsearch
> http://mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-users
>