Re: [rtcweb] ~"I'd love it if patents evaporated...If not now, when"

[David Singer <[e-mail]>]

On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:53 , Mike Linksvayer <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Harald Alvestrand, about 48 minutes into
> http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/Recordings/watch.jsp?recording=IETF88_RTCWEB_II&chapter=part_9
>> Development of codecs has been massively hampered and held back by
>> the  fact that it has been done in a fashion that has served to
>> maximize the  patent encumbrances on codecs. Sooner or later, we
>> should see a way  forward to abandon the dependence on encumbered
>> codecs also for video  software. My question, at this juncture,
>> is if not now, when?
> 
> I didn't hear an answer, but would love to hear one. It is conceivable
> I could be convinced of a compromise now, if it were obvious those
> individuals and businesses pushing for H.264 were also unambiguously
> helping fix the problem in the medium and longer term by helping
> next- VP9 and and next-next-generation Daala, and lobbying for the
> elimination of software patents.

MPEG has not one, not two, but three tracks for developing unencumbered or RF-only encumbered video, as an experiment.  I think there are a few people at MPEG who think that this optimization direction -- for cost of license -- is clearly applicable to some cases, and should be followed.

The need or bandwidth-saving at any cost -- the old optimization direction -- is slackening, IMHO.  Sometimes you want to optimize battery life (complexity), sometimes license cost, and so on.

There are not enough people, in my opinion, working on this at MPEG.  Getting involved, helping, would be good.

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.