Can someone explain why this is terrible for the licensors? If they have patents that apply, can't they pretty much setup whatever ridiculous roadblocks and tolls they desire?
Or are the open source codecs truly patent-free, as in they don't accidentally step on something that could be "infringing" legally?
The whole point of paying the MPEG-LA protection racket is that you don't get sued over patents. If there's another patent pool that claims to have their own patents embodied by one or more of the major proprietary codecs, that protection racket starts to look more like the sham it is. Someone can always come out of the woodwork and claim you're infringing one of their patents.
The open source codecs may accidentally step on something that could be infringing, and MPEG-LA and similar entities are always quick to point that out. The implied message is that you're safe when you use codecs under license with MPEG-LA maintained pools.
This demonstrates that the MPEG-LA also is no guarantee for patent safety (and if you read their fine print, they never actually claim to be), and so far this new organization is using similar strategies (not listing the patents, and right now, not even the patent owners) which are essentially FUD.
That this blows up in the media is not so much terrible for licensors or licensees, but for the pool forming bodies that sit in the middle to seek rent and for the codecs that did benefit from that 'safety'.
Or are the open source codecs truly patent-free, as in they don't accidentally step on something that could be "infringing" legally?