Re: [codec] Individuals and hats

Well, we have our own opinions of course, but any analysis of that sort is
up to you.

I'm not sure why you are discussing this on the list though, it seems
off-topic.  If you want to go deeper, contact me directly.

Stephen Botzko

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org>wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
>
> Thanks for the info. I must have missed that announcement. G.719 really
> hasn't got much traction so far, and there is always the risk of other
> patent claims surfacing, so the incentive to implement it still seems weak.
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> On 04/14/2011 10:24 PM, Stephen Botzko wrote:
>
>> Please see the announcement posted to this list (11 November 2009)  I've
>> cut/paste the text for your convenience.
>>
>> Stephen Botzko
>> >>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I have the following announcement regarding G.719
>>
>> Ericsson offers a royalty-free license under Ericsson's G.719 standard
>> essential patents for end user products.
>> The license agreement can be obtained by contacting
>> patent.licensing@ericsson.com <mailto:patent.licensing@ericsson.com>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Ingemar
>>
>> >>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Steve Underwood <steveu@coppice.org<mailto:
>> steveu@coppice.org>> wrote:
>>
>>    Hi Roni,
>>
>>
>>    On 04/14/2011 05:03 PM, Roni Even wrote:
>>
>>        Personally I am not involved in MPEG work at all. I had past
>>        experience with
>>        standardizing of G.719 which is a royalty free codec and I can
>>        also point
>>        that Anisse was also part of this work.
>>
>>    I am interested in that statement. The last time we checked,
>>    Polycom were making their patents on G.719 royalty free, on the
>>    same conditions as their patents on G.722.1. Ericsson were not.
>>    Has that changed?
>>
>>    Steve
>>
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    codec mailing list
>>    codec@ietf.org <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
>>
>>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
>>
>>
>>
>