Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue

Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at> Wed, 30 October 2013 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew@matthew.at>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76CA621E80F3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:53:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t8VCg+RdhxHi for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eeph.com (mail.eeph.com [192.135.198.155]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3756621F9FF1 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:52:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.10.155.2] (unknown [10.10.155.2]) (Authenticated sender: matthew@eeph.com) by mail.eeph.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F28FA3C9DE8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <52713962.3010201@matthew.at>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:52:50 -0700
From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <52681A96.2020904@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <52681A96.2020904@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 16:53:39 -0000

On 10/23/2013 11:51 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> The dominant video codec, H.264, is a royalty-required codec.
>
> Do we switch now, or do we give up and live with royalties forever?
>

This is a little dramatic. One can trivially prove that every technology 
required to implement H.264 will lose the protection of the patent 
system in a finite period of time. Much, much sooner than "forever".

Matthew Kaufman