Note that HTML5 in no way required Ogg (as denoted by the word "should" instead of "must" in the earlier draft). Adding this to the fact that there are widely available patent-free implementations of Ogg technology, there is really no excuse for Apple and Nokia to say that they couldn't in good faith implement HTML5 as previously formulated. Throw your own theory here: DRM, proprietary control, et cetera.

The WHATWG had an opportunity here to eliminate the plugin morass (so 90's) in favor of a baseline format that each browser could implement. Just as HTML specified baseline formats for images (GIF and PNG), this should have been an opportunity to specify baseline free audio and video. And there's still a chance.

Please, please help this issue get more public scrutiny. Use whatever means you deem necessary. Exert pressure on the WHATWG (subscribe now, let your thoughts be read). Don't let special interests kill computing for all — now it’s time to take a stand!

On their mailing list, so far:

• [whatwg] Removal of Ogg is *preposterous*
• [whatwg] Removal off Ogg technology

Though even if the spec were written to reccomend (or even require) Ogg, since when did people actually code their websites to validate? It's been how long since we said "to hell with bad browsers"?

Nokia has filed a submission with the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) objecting to the use of Ogg Theora as the baseline video standard for the Web. Ogg is an open encoding scheme (On2, the company that developed it, gave it and a free, perpetual unlimited license to its patents to the nonprofit Xiph foundation), but Nokia called it "proprietary" and argued for the inclusion of standards that can be used in conjunction with DRM, because "from our viewpoint, any DRM-incompatible video related mechanism is a non-starter with the content industry (Hollywood). There is in our opinion no need to make DRM support mandatory, though."

...

So DRM is by definition proprietary. If it's not proprietary, it can't be DRM.

And, of course, Ogg Theora is not proprietary. It does have some patents covering it, but those patents have been surrendered, to all intents and purposes.

...

Some Slashdot commenters have pointed out that they have technical problems with Ogg Theora. That's a valid discussion to have -- if the W3C is going to pick a video codec, its technical merits should be discussed. But remember, that's not what Nokia is objecting to: they are arguing that Ogg is proprietary (it isn't) and that DRM should be part of a Web standard (it shouldn't). PDF link to Nokia's W3C submission, Link to Slashdot comments.

Local mirror of Nokia's submission to W3C regarding Ogg Theora