Re: [codec] A concrete proposal for requirements and testing

[Stephan Wenger <[e-mail]>]

At this point, there is no indication that opus is going to be royalty
free.  In fact, there is evidence to the contrary:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1520/

Stephan


On 4.7.2011 12:13 , "Timothy B. Terriberry" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> I think that the issues of performance requirements and encumbered
>> technologies are separate. In fact, the WG charter states "The working
>>group
>
>I strongly disagree with this. Groups like my employer, Mozilla, are
>actually interested in deploying this codec on the internet (you know,
>the purpose for which this working group was formed), in things like
>RTC-Web. Royalty-free is a requirement for us, as well as for the W3C,
>where part of that work is being done. The alternatives are things like
>Speex, iLBC, and G.722, not AMR-NB or AMR-WB (see, for example,
>https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=476752#c20).
>
>> cannot explicitly rule out the possibility of adopting encumbered
>> technologies". At the end of the day, people will make their own
>>trade-off
>> between Opus performance and whether it is encumbered or not. So the
>> requirements need to include some reasonable performance targets, and
>>AMR-NB
>> and AMR-WB provide those.
>
>This is pure fallacy. You don't need to quote the charter to know that
>the structure of the patent system makes any guarantees impossible. Yet
>if Opus were eventually found to be encumbered, we still couldn't fall
>back to AMR-NB or AMR-WB. If you don't care about such encumbrances,
>then there are plenty of good alternatives, but the lack of them for
>those who do care is one of the reasons this WG was formed. The charter
>states this explicitly.
>
>The charter also mentions the possibility of co-publication of the
>completed codec by the ITU. Now, if you wanted to make such tests a
>requirement for co-publication, that would make perfect sense, but I
>don't believe it makes sense to prevent publication of the codec by this
>WG, regardless of their outcome.
>_______________________________________________
>codec mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec