AWS has removed its legal protections for customers using its video transcoding and streaming services, potentially exposing them to patent infringement claims from codec rights holders. The change affects six services, including the popular file-based video processing service MediaConvert and live video encoding service MediaLive.
Going forward, AWS customers using media services must independently assess third-party patent risk and eventually negotiate separate licensing. The change follows the provider’s failure to reach licensing agreements with patent holders it describes as demanding unreasonable fees.
While Amazon did not announce the change through its traditional public channels, the cloud provider contacted all customers already using the affected services to inform them of the change in the terms and conditions, criticizing the royalty demands from video patent holders as unreasonable. In the email, AWS wrote:
As AWS engages in licensing discussions with patent holders of media codec technology, some are increasingly refusing to license service providers like AWS, or do not offer reasonable terms that protect our customers. Some patent holders request license payments that far exceed the value of their patented technology, in amounts that are not feasible for these AWS services to pay without necessitating price increases for all customers of these services.
The affected services are Elemental MediaLive, Elemental MediaConvert, Amazon Interactive Video Service, Chime SDK, GameLift Streams, and Kinesis Video Services. Corey Quinn, chief cloud economist at The Duckbill Group, comments:
If patent trolls come knocking about your video encoding, you’re handling that lawsuit solo. (…) That sound is what customers make when AWS throws them under the bus.
Given the large number of input and output formats for video and audio files and codecs, there is no simple way for developers to determine which ones may be problematic. The cloud provider added:
Rather than raising prices, we are updating our Service Terms to specify that AWS does not have defense or payment obligations for third-party patent claims against you related to use of these services for audio/video encoding, decoding, or transcoding. This approach is commonplace across cloud media services providers.
Azure still provides indemnity against third-party IP claims, including patents and copyright under programs like Azure IP Advantage. The program provides customers with defensive patent licensing rights and access to Microsoft’s patent portfolio, enabling them to discourage or counter claims from patent trolls. On the official community AWS Q&A platform re:Post, a developer questions:
If we don’t know which codecs may be impacted, how are we to assess our operations to determine the legal risk, or figure out if we should say use a different codec or license the codec at issue if we can’t work around it? The entire point of AWS is for you to manage the complex stuff so we don’t have to. It seems derelict for you to release this vague statement of legal risk with no details.
The change in terms took place on February 2nd and applies only to codec and media services; the cloud provider continues to offer IP infringement protection to customers using other managed services. AWS says it will still honor all obligations regarding codec disputes prior to this change.
