[jws]

It looks like the patent the court found infringed is EP2575366 https://patents.google.com/patent/EP2575366B1/en

"Signaling of coding unit prediction and prediction unit partition mode for video coding" which ridiculously oversimplified to near uselessness is encoding video using a single binary tree to select from different possible encodings of P and B frames?

I wonder if it is possible to encode HEVC without using this technique and it was just that Netflix's encoders used it, or is this integral to all HEVC. (Broadcom has had lots of discovery in the US version of this lawsuit, so they could know which products and devices Netflix uses to encode their video.)

And just for a scope of the number of patents out there whose owners claim are relevant to HEVC…

The MPEG-LA patent pool has about 10000 applicable patents for HEVC and licenses for $0.20 per device.

ATT, Motorola, Nokia, and Microsoft refused to join MPEG-LA and made their own 500 patent pool covering HEVC and charge $2/device + 0.5% of revenue from streaming.

Then there are the wildcard gamblers like Broadcom - not a pool member and swooping in with patents designed to be infringed by HEVC implementors which even indicate in the patent that the inventors were aware of the internals of the as yet unreleased HEVC standard.

[ksec]

>ATT, Motorola, Nokia, and Microsoft refused to join MPEG-LA and made their own 500 patent pool covering HEVC and charge $2/device + 0.5% of revenue from streaming.

Not true. You are referring to early HEVC Advance terms purposed which never happened.

>I wonder if it is possible to encode HEVC without using this technique and it was just that Netflix's encoders used it,

Probably not given how board that patent seems to imply. To the point I would guess even AV1 may infringe on it.