Technology

59589 readers

3332 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

247

submitted 8 months ago by p1mrx@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.world

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I thought they have to license the usage of HDMI so pay royalties to the HDMI foundation ...

[–] warm@kbin.earth 14 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Who do you think setup and owns the HDMI foundation?

Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba, Philips etc...

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

So? I dont follow, how does that change things?

[–] warm@kbin.earth 7 points 8 months ago

Youve lost me, why would the TV manufacturers who get royalties from licensing HDMI want to offer a free alternative?

[–] tb_@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The TV manufacturers own the HDMI foundation.

Other devices being "forced" to implement HDMI ports, because every TV has them, might benefit those TV manufacturers.

Not sure how exactly that would work, I assume it gives them some level of control/power.

[–] WallEx@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago

OK thanks for the explanation, I'm still a bit lost, but oh well ^^

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago

If they're profiting more than they're paying for maintaining this standard as the default then they don't want it to change