IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Thu, 04 December 2014 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F23A1A1A82 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:04:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DCrUYLAAttE8 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com (mail-wg0-f46.google.com [74.125.82.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 774F21A0385 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id a1so15668560wgh.33 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:04:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=reW5rid6JTDp4IG/ZcZimLMm3NKw/1m4F0Spjs0Gcus=; b=dTkG9R+bfn8mr6unUOBveGX6cN6zFxdw3wxzl2zryUfSmtocyvjO+l/Bl22L4q8I1Y /UalvKf59OtxKDlueFrnubMqm68kBZF0fVU8rDm/o7lhB9e5X/8sKqWrZoWKbs7gFznG fwSLJ2ijxtnmF3fJusWYBt5pZ70VMVdt5f+H6WHkGjOO3QS5aFPouXQYKRO3zqYLSY5m 7FoHw8/m7FckO6NcXmFVWzjOlV8xWwFEtT4Vm22/+YJfkz5lwiIMEYQAihEtxp+xFwXk GFCwO9cLJsS8OHjK+sUl2jVo9V5qqEwjSdNy/+4/Jr2XdtF4Fqgn2Z0Vq0UIMwr0cD+l x1YQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmkxrIuYgdHNlDh4rqPzb+N45fVYCbxP6h1tuTpL7lAfAh+1k8dQc3L/D1+qFZLOl5EkAtc
X-Received: by 10.194.216.170 with SMTP id or10mr15607695wjc.96.1417727074304; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:04:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com. [209.85.212.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ep9sm8300391wid.3.2014.12.04.13.04.33 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:04:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id bs8so37637794wib.5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:04:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.78.9 with SMTP id x9mr24533745wiw.39.1417727073130; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 13:04:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.70.16 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 13:04:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B28CDFF@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <547511DB.5050100@nostrum.com> <54759A4C.6020806@gmail.com> <5476092D.4010406@nostrum.com> <15EF2452-2C2C-420B-B972-C37EACE57850@apple.com> <CAHp8n2m+KMnui30_fMrwM+81UX-RUJM2ktuiZuPpRSnC7dxqcA@mail.gmail.com> <20141204014218.5955730.38619.3157@blackberry.com> <CAHp8n2=KWuTsmruz3W-90eAsptSoMYLTUVtyx9pAwcZFGXSKCQ@mail.gmail.com> <CB477124-13AD-47EA-A607-8A81AFFA379E@apple.com> <CAHp8n2n1m6WRaBPNyKpowPEz_BK-SAMMFWTiB7d-eVL69w4rpQ@mail.gmail.com> <1F326DF9-79C2-4562-853B-240D934EA235@apple.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B28CDFF@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 16:04:32 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxv+s_2qEGaYADi=-j-0Rn=pw_7Okd7Uv0qqKPnTyeXh+g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d043bdece95206005096a4ec5"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/1uc3bUhF-JzVoTCPxah29R7k3sQ
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 21:04:38 -0000

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:43 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <
keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

> As a tangent to this discussion, I'd note that pretty much every codec
> implementor will be subject to additional IPR risk. This is because pretty
> much all the standards specifications of codecs only specify the decoder
> (VP8 included). Therefore any IPR claims and licences tied to the
> specification will only have relevance to the decoder.
>
> Unless you have a viable application that only needs the decoder, you will
> have zero visibility in the standards IPR databases of what IPR claims
> might exist against your coder implementation.
>
> Everyone who uses the term "codec" in association with "royalty free" or
> "IPR free" is misleading the world. What they mean is the decoder only.
>
>
Actually Google does grant patent license to the implementation of WebM,
which includes both encoder and decoder (
http://www.webmproject.org/license/additional/). This is one of the reasons
we think VP8 license is better then H.264. (The other two are reciprocity
and no use restrictions on the produced media).
_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email