IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Monty Montgomery <xiphmont@gmail.com> Thu, 07 April 2011 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <xiphmont@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D75028C12C for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:09:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lbCQ9GBUI1pg for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C2C28C0DB for <codec@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:09:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so2796495wyb.31 for <codec@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 13:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=aor03YT0C9CaEdFA7vjH+KTP95H/sjXQfelvsJddctg=; b=ECDHSD3xZr8sJZt3QXVEhmyGMpJBy7as3EOWs69papu0OsRKG0Wqymr7JXFpdspyDs WMuyxXdhC2k3vsHz3+p4JjUNbt7fJGOoIAZjf49F/uoocxSN3flQWQ45GgspXczRSlo7 eF+gMSPrzy9V/aoDJ4Kclm73j5K0u7m/aiw2U=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=axo1SEdTsELRBfkd8Dy2MqOUa1ODZ+zKiiu5iVXTsohSlT6ErX0idySXf7J29YxxTp 18oJic9DccPbMoDsuTQdGpQGvkRKBbLnSHvRxHow7t/svD8NAOpi/lXVD+7zpSx2SKyE LEWxZPSNM4hwiUtwbuoyJUNzZOd8i9Er6nD3s=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.61.13 with SMTP id r13mr1381312wbh.52.1302207087378; Thu, 07 Apr 2011 13:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.227.152.130 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C9C35CE8.2A02B%stewe@stewe.org>
References: <4D9E0CBC.1060404@xiph.org> <C9C35CE8.2A02B%stewe@stewe.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:11:27 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTikvx65MP96w=akZy+Mnz=cJ2P_2iw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Monty Montgomery <xiphmont@gmail.com>
To: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: codec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [codec] A concrete proposal for requirements and testing
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 20:09:51 -0000

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> wrote:
> At this point, there is no indication that opus is going to be royalty
> free.

Those most concerned with delivering royalty free status would appear to be
no more concerned than at any earlier point in the process.

>   In fact, there is evidence to the contrary:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1520/

How so?  This is evidence that things are working properly and as hoped
(and kudos to Qualcomm for acting in spirit).

With patent numbers of concern in hand, we can make certain those
patents either do not read on a final standard or are freely
licensed if used.  IPR declarations greatly enhance the certainty
of the project, they do not detract.

Monty
Xiph.Org

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email