The Secret History of WebRTC (And Why Google Made It Free)
In 2011, Google did something unusual. They bought a company for $68.2 million, then immediately gave the technology away for free.
Not "free with ads." Not "free trial." Actually free. Open source. Anyone could use it, modify it, build businesses on it.
Why would Google do that? The answer is more interesting than you think.
Before WebRTC: The plugin nightmare
Remember the early 2010s internet?
Want to video chat? Download Skype. Oh wait, Safari? Download different plugin. Linux user? Good luck.
Want to send files? Install Java. Oh, it's blocked by your company? Too bad.
Want to play multiplayer games in browser? Flash. Which didn't work on iPhone. And had more security holes than Swiss cheese.
Every browser needed different plugins. Every operating system had compatibility issues. And none of them worked on mobile.
It was a mess.
The company Google bought
Global IP Solutions (GIPS). Swedish company. Nobody outside tech had heard of them.
What they did: Built voice and video technology. Sell licenses to companies like Skype, WebEx, Yahoo Messenger.
Their tech was everywhere. If you made a video call in the late 2000s, GIPS technology probably powered it.
Google bought them in 2010. Everyone expected Google to keep it proprietary. Build better Hangouts. Compete with Skype.
Instead? They open-sourced it. Gave it to the world. For free.
Why Google did it (the real story)
Official reason: "To advance web standards and make the internet better."
Actual reasons: More complicated.
Reason 1: Kill Flash
Adobe Flash was everywhere. Google hated it. Flash crashed. Flash had security problems. Flash didn't work on mobile. Flash was proprietary (Adobe controlled it).
But developers kept using it because it was the only way to do certain things like real-time video.
Give developers a free, open alternative? They'd abandon Flash.
And they did. Flash is now dead. RIP.
Reason 2: Undermine Skype
Microsoft was about to buy Skype (they did, for $8.5 billion). That would give Microsoft dominance in video calling.
Make video calling free and open? Suddenly Skype's proprietary advantage disappears.
Can't compete with free.
Reason 3: Make the web more powerful
Google's business depends on people using the web. The more powerful the web, the more ads Google can show.
Native apps were winning. People downloaded Skype, WhatsApp, FaceTime instead of using web browsers.
Make the web capable of real-time communication? Developers build web apps instead of native apps. More people use Chrome. Google wins.
Reason 4: They'd already paid for it
Google spent $68 million. They were going to use the tech anyway. Might as well open-source it and get strategic benefits.
Plus: Open source means thousands of developers improving it for free. That's a great deal.
The battle to make it a standard
Google open-sourcing code was one thing. Getting it accepted as a web standard? Different story.
The players:
- Google (pushing WebRTC)
- Apple (skeptical, dragging feet)
- Microsoft (had Skype, not interested)
- Mozilla (supportive but cautious)
- Telecom companies (afraid of losing money)
Apple's resistance
Apple didn't add WebRTC to Safari until 2017. Seven years after Google released it.
Why? FaceTime. Apple made money from FaceTime. Why enable competition?
What changed? Developers kept asking. Enterprise customers demanded it. Apple finally caved.
But even then, Safari's implementation was buggy for years. "Oops."
Microsoft's skepticism
Microsoft owned Skype. WebRTC was a threat. Why help?
Initially, they pushed a competing standard (CU-RTC). Tried to fragment the market.
Didn't work. Everyone else went with WebRTC. Microsoft eventually added support (reluctantly).
Telecom companies freaking out
Phone companies made billions from international calls. Video calling was a threat.
WebRTC meant free video calls anywhere. No phone company needed.
They lobbied against it. Argued it was "insecure." Tried to require "carrier approval."
They lost. The internet doesn't ask carriers for permission.
The early days were rough
First WebRTC implementations were buggy as hell.
Common problems:
- Connections failed randomly
- Echo and feedback issues
- Browser compatibility nightmares
- Firewall traversal didn't work
- Mobile support was terrible
Developers: "This is supposed to be easier?"
Many gave up. Stuck with Flash or native apps.
The turning point: COVID-19
- World shuts down. Everyone suddenly needs video calling.
Zoom explodes. But Zoom has problems security issues, privacy concerns, capacity problems.
Suddenly, developers remember: "Wait, we can build our own with WebRTC."
And they do. Hundreds of video calling apps launch. Telehealth platforms. Virtual classrooms. Remote work tools.
WebRTC handles the load. No central servers buckling under traffic. Peer-to-peer scales naturally.
Google's long game pays off. The web is powerful enough for a global pandemic.
The unexpected uses
Google intended WebRTC for video calls and file sharing. Developers had other ideas:
Remote surgery: Doctors performing surgery remotely. Low latency matters when cutting into someone.
Drone control: Real-time video from drones. Military and civilian use.
Gaming: Multiplayer games with voice chat. Better than Discord for low-latency communication.
IoT: Security cameras streaming directly to your phone. No cloud needed.
Screen sharing: Remote support, online teaching, collaboration.
Nobody predicted all of this in 2010.
The companies built on WebRTC
Some familiar names run on WebRTC under the hood:
Discord: Voice chat uses WebRTC. That's why it's so responsive.
WhatsApp Web: Video calls run on WebRTC.
Facebook Messenger: Video calling? WebRTC.
Google Meet: Obviously. Google's own product.
Zoom: Actually uses WebRTC for browser-based calls. Ironic.
Twitch: Low-latency streaming option uses WebRTC.
Most users have no idea. They just know it works.
What if Google hadn't done this?
Alternate timeline:
Google keeps GIPS technology proprietary. Uses it for Hangouts only.
Video calling remains fragmented. Different apps, different platforms, different plugins.
COVID-19 hits. Video calling infrastructure collapses under load. Centralized services can't scale fast enough.
Remote work is harder. Telemedicine is clunkier. Online education struggles more.
We dodged a bullet by Google deciding to open-source instead of hoard.
The criticism
Not everyone thinks Google was altruistic:
Critics say: "Google didn't do this out of kindness. They did it for strategic advantage."
Fair point. Google benefited enormously. Chrome became dominant partly because it had the best WebRTC support.
But also: Strategic advantage and public good aren't mutually exclusive. Google won. Users won. Developers won. Pretty good outcome.
What we learned
Big tech can do good things when it aligns with their interests. Google open-sourcing WebRTC was self-serving AND beneficial.
Open standards matter. Proprietary tech (Flash, Skype) gets left behind. Open tech (WebRTC) gets adopted everywhere.
Timing is everything. WebRTC launched in 2011. Took a decade to really matter. Long-term thinking paid off.
Competition drives progress. Microsoft resisted. Apple dragged their feet. But eventually, pressure from developers and users forced them to comply.
The future
WebRTC keeps evolving:
AV1 codec: Better compression, better quality, royalty-free.
ML enhancement: AI improving video quality, removing backgrounds, cleaning audio.
Better mobile: Battery life improvements, better adaptation to cellular networks.
WebTransport: Next evolution, even lower latency.
Google's $68 million investment in 2010? Might be the best ROI in tech history.
The bottom line
WebRTC exists because:
- Google wanted to kill Flash ✓
- Google wanted to undermine Skype ✓
- Google wanted the web to be powerful ✓
- Google wanted to dominate browsers ✓
And also: It made the internet genuinely better. Free video calling. Better web apps. Real-time communication for everyone.
Sometimes corporate self-interest and public good align perfectly.
That Swedish company nobody had heard of? Their technology now powers billions of video calls. Your doctor appointment. Your kid's online class. Your work meeting. Your video date during lockdown.
All because Google bought them and gave it away.
Not all hero stories have capes. Some have quarterly earnings reports and strategic roadmaps.
Built with WebRTC: Check out NotesQR for peer-to-peer file transfers.
Related Articles
Christmas Video Calls Are a Real-Time Stress Test
Christmas and the end of the year push real-time networks to their limits. Millions of people calling home at the same time turn simple video calls into the hardest test of the year.
The Craziest Things People Have Built With WebRTC
Remote surgery, controlling drones, connecting Antarctica here are the wildest real-world uses of WebRTC you've never heard about.
When WebRTC Goes Wrong: Epic Fails and Lessons Learned
WebRTC is great when it works. When it doesn't? Chaos. Here are the most spectacular failures and what we learned from them.
Storage Virtualization: Making the Most of Your Storage Space
Understanding how modern storage systems work smarter to save space and money. Explained in plain English.
Stop Paying for Cloud Storage: How WebRTC Saves You Money
Discover how WebRTC eliminates cloud storage costs by transferring files directly between devices. Save hundreds or thousands annually.
Latency Is a Feeling, Not a Number
We talk about latency in milliseconds, but users experience it emotionally. Here’s why delay isn’t a metric it’s a sensation, and why WebRTC lives and dies by that truth.