deberian haber estandarizado el uso de ogg en html5 

Lo que no entiendo es como está eso de las licencias, por que ni dios paga por usarlo.

MPEG LA splits the H.264 license portfolio into two sublicenses: one for manufacturers of encoders or decoders and the other for distributors of content. …

The sublicense on the distribution side gets further split out to four key subcategories, two of which (subscription and title-by-title purchase or paid use) are tied to whether the end user pays directly for video services, and two of which (“free” television and internet broadcast) are tied to remuneration from sources other than the end viewer. …

The licensing fee for “free” television is based on one of two royalty options. The first is a one-time payment of $2,500 per AVC transmission encoder, which covers one AVC encoder “used by or on behalf of a Licensee in transmitting AVC video to the End User,” who will decode and view it. If you’re wondering whether this is a double charge, the answer is yes: A license fee has already been charged to the encoder manufacturer, and the broadcaster will in turn pay one of the two royalty options.

The second licensing fee is an annual broadcast fee. … The annual broadcast fee is broken down by viewership sizes:

• $2,500 per calendar year per broadcast markets of 100,000–499,999 television households
• $5,000 per calendar year per broadcast market of 500,000–999,999 television households
• $10,000 per calendar year per broadcast market of 1,000,000 or more television households

… With all the issues around “free” television, why should someone involved in nonbroadcast delivery care? As I mentioned before, the participation fees apply to any delivery of content. After defining that “free” television meant more than just [over-the-air], MPEG LA went on to define participation fees for internet broadcasting as “AVC video that is delivered via the Worldwide Internet to an end user for which the end user does not pay remuneration for the right to receive or view.” In other words, any public broadcast, whether it is [over-the-air], cable, satellite, or the internet, is subject to participation fees. …

The fees are potentially somewhat steeper for internet broadcasts, perhaps assuming that internet delivery will grow much faster than OTA or “free” television via cable or satellite. Adding the “free television” broadcast-market fee together with an additional fee, MPEG LA grants a reprieve of sorts during the first license term, which ends on Dec. 31, 2010, and notes that “after the first term the royalty shall be no more than the economic equivalent of royalties payable during the same time for free television.”

That last part — about the fee structure for internet broadcasts — has already been amended. The MPEG-LA recently announced that free internet streaming would be extended through December 31, 2015. And after that… who knows?