Re: [rtcweb] Google VP8 Patent Grant for third parties [Was Re:Proposal for H.263 baseline codec]

"Paul E. Jones" <> Thu, 19 April 2012 03:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6F021F8446 for <>; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:54:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.26
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.26 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.339, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZWbNwj3PAFYx for <>; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:54:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A19D621F8447 for <>; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 20:54:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sydney ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q3J3s827018160 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 18 Apr 2012 23:54:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=dublin; t=1334807649; bh=jQ6EnG/jcM9e0t5LRxxn/zFpFVTV/lutHfQzm7kA5dk=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Z4+mv5CEP+vQYfqyh9F7rYMSi6mFB7wbww/IZyT/T/NmhcjJimarvj3BPNIWvSS3t ZfTX+2BkjJ69S+cED5qcrXhxrS4xCVPhofd+ShRs0GsAappMwVknCxSJis90bp47MO 5wwBUNv81xW+2RHfNiXw5GeK8Qq8/LmJdI26ewEY=
From: "Paul E. Jones" <>
To: "'Olle E. Johansson'" <>, "'Kevin P. Fleming'" <>
References: <> <03ac01cd120d$0ffe95f0$2ffbc1d0$> <> <03e301cd1223$153e6b60$3fbb4220$> <> <007b01cd12f7$fbcd72e0$f36858a0$> <> <> <> <> <06d401cd1ddf$4bf78e80$e3e6ab80$>
In-Reply-To: <06d401cd1ddf$4bf78e80$e3e6ab80$>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 23:54:27 -0400
Message-ID: <06d601cd1de0$1e5a3300$5b0e9900$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQB2060nC5aqi+YrENoaiW0zV5P0JgFWJR9uAc/AjNwB1VzUBAGtdKoUAdUR/YICM5hPIgEftaPaAd+SP4UB8tiC0QIWgscXmMBHtOA=
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Google VP8 Patent Grant for third parties [Was Re:Proposal for H.263 baseline codec]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 03:54:18 -0000

I hate auto-correct.

"even both" --> "even bother"
"owner fely that" --> "owner felt that"

I hope the text can be parsed by most ;-)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf
> Of Paul E. Jones
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 11:49 PM
> To: 'Olle E. Johansson'; 'Kevin P. Fleming'
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Google VP8 Patent Grant for third parties [Was
> Re:Proposal for H.263 baseline codec]
> Olle,
> > 12 apr 2012 kl. 18:09 skrev Kevin P. Fleming:
> >
> > > On 04/12/2012 02:21 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
> > >
> > >> This is really bad news for Open Source. Even if we try to get a
> > >> way to
> > pay for licenses, our business model is far away from understandable
> > for most of the syndicates. I tried with the AMR codec once and it
> > stopped at initial order quantity. Anything under 10.000 licenses was
> > not up for discussion.
> Would a patent holder even both with litigation if the patent owner fely
> that licensing in quantities of less than 10,000 units is not worth the
> money?  Likely not.  Litigation is expensive and patent trolls will only
> do it if there is money to be made.  Legitimate companies do not sue
> unless there is either profit to be made or (as with the
> Microsoft/Motorola case) there is big money at stake related to something
> bigger than what the legal case is over.
> That said, there is always the risk of getting sued before you can get the
> front doors to your small business propped open.  Still, one cannot stop
> out of fear of legal action.  Half the companies in Silicon Valley would
> never have opened if they concerned themselves too much with patents.
> However, if successful, a day will come when it's "time to pay the fiddler
> his due."  And when that day comes, there is some comfort in knowing who
> you go to in order to license the technology you are using.
> > >> G.729 is available on one-by-one basis which both Asterisk and
> > FreeSwitch sell to users... I have no insight into how these
> > agreements was worked out, but it at least indicates that someone tries
> to open up.
> > >
> > > It is my understanding that the licensing arrangements that have
> > > been
> > made for G.729 are no longer an option for new licensees (not offered
> > by the consortium), and to my knowledge such arrangements have never
> > been an option for any of the other voice/video codecs that our
> > customers have asked us about (including H.264, the AMR family and
> others).
> >
> > And isn't that a shame. The question here for the legal department is
> > wether Google's policies in regards to VP8 is enough for companies
> > like you to work with it in either binary addons or Open Source code?
> > Does it provide enough liability assurance?
> Google's policies will not prevent you from getting sued one day when
> successful.  What would make me feel better is if Google could indemnify
> people.  If they feel they own all of the technology in VP8, they could
> indemnify people.  I would be pleasantly surprised if their legal team
> truly feels so confident that they own all of the technology in VP8,
> though.
> With H.264, you know where to go license technology once you start to see
> a little success.  The IPR holders are known.  I cannot imagine a troll
> out there who wouldn't have already filed a lawsuit by now.  (And I'll
> note again that VP8 might even have elements that are covered by IPR
> holders who also own IPR on H.264 and who may not be so willing to license
> it for use with VP8.  I see a definite business risk there that I don't
> see with AMR or
> H.264.)
> > I think that question is where we are right now.
> >
> > If not, will Google try to offer a solution?
> I would not suggest you hold your breath :-)  I applaud Google for taking
> the steps it has taken so far, but I do not think there is more they can
> offer than what they have already.
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list