Re: [codec] Royalty Free codec standards -- don't settle for less

[Eric Burger <[e-mail]>]

In practical terms, I agree that there will be better and better  
codecs in the future. However, I would offer the older codecs are good  
enough for our purposes and will be safe.

On Nov 11, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Stephan Wenger wrote:

> The existence of at least a dozend of projects in the speech coding  
> field
> today suggests to me that we have not yet reached the point of  
> technology
> progress saturation in this field.  Other that this minor point, I  
> agree.
>
> Stephan
>
>
>
> On 11/11/09 12:26 PM, "Koen Vos" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> 1. Technological progress saturates.
>> 2. Patents expire.
>> Therefore, the performance advantage of royalty-bearing standards
>> diminishes with time, and high-quality, royalty-free standards are
>> unavoidable. I'm convinced that today we have reached this point of
>> commoditization for audio and speech coding technology.
>>
>> koen.
>>
>>
>> Quoting Rob Glidden:
>>> Here is my view, perhaps you share it, perhaps you don't.
>>>
>>> What the world needs now is royalty-free, standardized codecs.  This
>>> is critical to the future of the Web, and the progress the Internet
>>> has brought to the world, and will bring to the world.
>>>
>>> Video, audio, transport, the whole thing.  Evaluated, vetted for
>>> patents. Under an appropriate, responsible and complete royalty free
>>> process.  No less.
>>>
>>> IETF, ITU, and ISO/MPEG should all get going on this important
>>> activity -- after all why shouldn't all of these organizations
>>> include this as core to their mission.
>>>
>>> I have, and no doubt you have too, seen countless explanations why
>>> this should not, could not, will not, rather not, might not, or can
>>> not happen.  Some well meaning and sincere, some from vested
>>> interests.  There are too many "powerful" interests against it.
>>> "Important" commercial interests are ambivalent.  It is too hard
>>> "legally" or "politically" or "technically".  It is just too
>>> confusing to think through.  There is no longer a critical mass that
>>> cares enough about keeping the future of the Open Internet open and
>>> royalty free.  The well meaning are ignorant, or naive.  Etc.
>>>
>>> Don't settle.  Take the issue of royalty free, standardized codecs
>>> all the way to the top of these organizations. Do what it takes.  If
>>> it requires new organizations, start them. It it requires revised
>>> processes, revise them. This is the spirit that built the Web and
>>> the Internet, this is the spirit that is its lifeblood, and this is
>>> the spirit that needs to be at the heart of its future.
>>>
>>> Don't settle.  Don't let those who have tried hard already, or have
>>> only half-heartedly tried, justify the status quo or their
>>> half-heartedness.  Encourage them to focus on how to take the next
>>> steps.  Don't let convenient "interpretations" of standards
>>> processes be an excuse for never starting, never finishing, or never
>>> setting up processes that will work.  Need more legal background?
>>> Find it. More technical information? Get it.
>>>
>>> Don't settle.  The world has plenty of patent-encumbered media
>>> standards, plenty of proprietary solutions, and plenty of standards
>>> in other domains that have figured out how to deliver royalty free.
>>> But the world does not have enough royalty-free codec standards, so
>>> this is the task that needs to be addressed.
>>>
>>> Rob
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> codec mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> codec mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec