Re: [codec] Last Call: <draft-ietf-codec-guidelines-05.txt> (Guidelines for the Codec Development Within the IETF) to Informational RFC

I have some issues with the way that the section on IPR is written.
While I agree with most of the statements there. I don't see my two
biggest IPR concerns listed.

1) Specific to this document, we already have unencumbered CODECs that
permit encoding of audio and video with acceptable fidelity and
adequate compression for 95% of all purposes. Thus it is essential
that the IPR regime for any future CODEC strictly limits the cost of
using that technique to some portion of the cost savings from
reduction in bandwidth use.

2) The principal concern I have with IPR licensing in general is not
the cost of licensing but the difficulty of licensing. I have on
several occasions been in negotiations with an IPR holder who is
completely unable to decide how much money they want or on what terms
they are willing to offer their IPR.

3) Linked to that is the problem of uncertainty. A purported rights
holder can only grant a license for the rights they hold, they cannot
and will not provide a warranty with respect to any other rights.
While due to the lingering effects of submarine patents it is
impossible to know if any CODEC is completely unencumbered, it is a
very safe bet that the audio codecs used for cinema sound in the mid
1980s are now unencumbered. It is not possible to be confident that
any new audio codec is unencumbered.

Taken in combination, I cannot imagine any reason to use any audio
codec other than MP3 or AC2 (or some other similar legacy scheme) once
we can be assured that the corresponding patents have expired. I
really could not care less what fidelity or other benefits might be
claimed for them. Bandwidth and storage are much cheaper than the
financial benefits offered by the technology held by the rights
holders.

The situation is very slightly different for video codecs, but not by
a great deal.

So the overall experience has been that it is like trying to negotiate
the purchase of some fancy-schmancy kitchen cabinets from some guy who
hasn't a clue about business but is desperate to make sure that they
don't leave a penny on the table even if his dithering about is likely
to cost him the business. Meanwhile you can get a perfectly
serviceable set of cabinets from Home Depot and Lowes where they will
give you price on the page ordering. In this case there is a free
alternative in almost every application worth bothering about.

On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:12 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request from the Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG
> (codec) to consider the following document:
> - 'Guidelines for the Codec Development Within the IETF'
>  <draft-ietf-codec-guidelines-05.txt> as an Informational RFC
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-10-19. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>
>   This document provides general guidelines for work on developing and
>   specifying a codec within the IETF.  These guidelines cover the
>   development process, evaluation, requirements conformance, and
>   intellectual property issues.
>
>
>
>
> The file can be obtained via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-codec-guidelines/
>
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-codec-guidelines/
>
>
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/