Re: [rtcweb] Cisco to open source its H.264 implementation and absorb MPEG-LA licensing fees

Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com> Fri, 13 December 2013 03:10 UTC

Return-Path: <engel.nyst@gmail.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 8A9F11AE5EF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:10:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 NPhUeK2c7aTV for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:10:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-x230.google.com (mail-ee0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 942EA1AE03A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:10:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f48.google.com with SMTP id e49so601363eek.7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:10:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=VHl0rXjBWM4uqmuRF92dh4gsIcD/ztqtb+IMIjgLkc8=; b=DTyFDItlAdhuVbnJsuSXswZjnP/+UZXeBo7BZEWApAr0ZYFZFlGVpLjy8RzraKwRdC xCfSNFyXr7KrF/o10onksRbNrsbv/Mvv/yV4V4oM7Qd9Ujv5OmyCcxpXXeFP8ZCHmvHx DeB7a4d2+3OJ+972jNeT4574Y0MYy6UR9xEIIQAtgen7JHPxOkV6gkuGaNB8QHU/DhxV n6tkh7Pv8NNUfa1ClM2Wn3YFA7ECyrFX+6ld6VSoZ+lVtf0WYceR8z+TgnM3ycc2xrL/ bWliOHllGOAnfH9jj9sQd2D9nKqdD+qUOQISCnZk5RE8mW37Uw/I9XuH8lATMOjz3X95 fk/Q==
X-Received: by 10.14.173.7 with SMTP id u7mr271208eel.24.1386904244995; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.33] ([109.100.150.49]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e3sm1626258eeg.11.2013.12.12.19.10.43 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 12 Dec 2013 19:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <52AA7A5D.5050409@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 05:09:17 +0200
From: Engel Nyst <engel.nyst@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20131104 Icedove/17.0.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" <mzanaty@cisco.com>
References: <186CE8D65BA3A741A81A543F936DD0D10A5803D8@xmb-rcd-x07.cisco.com> <A672E2AB-827D-46E8-9EB1-D7ED82B10B94@cisco.com> <20131211193239.GK3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <558F8D49-4024-4DF1-9A9E-AF422F1292C2@iii.ca> <20131212011550.GM3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <E8882BCE-4795-4CF5-B785-18C2141A5DE2@iii.ca> <CAD5OKxvy8xGuiR7oUbJJwTaxGfPJ=MHpd8Hp5MfpPLy8LmNaQg@mail.gmail.com> <D5A2C5EC-C65F-4E39-9A56-315B94C5FB1D@iii.ca> <CAD5OKxs-OoqwbQgBy7K4wQRffCk0=8Qmo_xJQdSwhBL2F85v1g@mail.gmail.com> <20131212214310.GR3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <CAD5OKxtvEUG1tCbPYB1rgTQG2ASPX=qKS2isz=GbYrY-BG72Aw@mail.gmail.com> <52AA37E3.3030407@bbs.darktech.org> <CECFD274.20515%mzanaty@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CECFD274.20515%mzanaty@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Cisco to open source its H.264 implementation and absorb MPEG-LA licensing fees
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: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 03:10:54 -0000

On 12/13/2013 04:32 AM, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) wrote:
> I think you mean open source in general, not openh264 specifically.
> The same can be done with VP8, Linux, or any widely used project. So
> should we 10-finger every contributor and demand a license to every
> thought they ever had or will have? Contributions to the openh264
> project will certainly be thoroughly reviewed, not just by Cisco, but
> hopefully a much larger community. But it is unreasonable to expect
> reviewers to sniff out potential IPR trojans. It is also unreasonable
> to demand review of the contributors rather than their contributions.
> Open source projects would grind to a halt if they succumb to such
> FUD.

Please note for VP8, the overall license includes a patent grant, both 
for currently owned patents and those acquired in the future.

In general, newer Open Source licenses or updated licenses, include a 
patent grant, from any licensor/contributor.

In particular, from (large) projects using older licenses, I don't 
remember any project that intently withholds patents /AND/ actively uses 
them to require a separate license.

This widespread practical fact shapes the understanding of those 
licenses in the community, and it is used to argue by some that in those 
older licenses (BSD, GPLv2), patent grants are implied.

I don't know if they're implied or not, and I am not a lawyer.

I just think there is a significant difference between ignoring patents 
completely, in the license and in the project in general, which gives 
users a potential defense in good faith; and withholding patents, with 
the intention to require a separate deal, while using a license that 
reads the same way as the license of all the many projects who never do.

> On 12/12/13, 5:25 PM, cowwoc
> <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org<mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>
> openh264 is a patent troll's wet dream.
>
> If I were a troll, I'd fork openh264, contribute some juicy code
> sniplet that enhances the codec, and wait for Cisco to integrate it
> into the official version. 3-6 months later, I'd sue everyone who
> uses it.
>
> Note that "everyone who uses it" refers to the thousands of companies
> who are expected to compile the codec for themselves under the false
> impression that they are safe because they have under 100k
> deployments. Because Cisco makes no attempt to review the code for
> IPR, and many companies are expected to use it, it makes it a very
> attractive target for patent trolls. And good luck linking the
> contributor back to the troll. There are plenty ways of contributing
> code by proxy or anonymously to avoid detection.
>
> I bring this up to point out that you cannot really treat the
> software license independently from IPR. The two go hand in hand. If
> you're going to accept contributions from the public, you're going to
> have to review it for IPR, and good luck going down that road...
>
> Gili
>
> On 12/12/2013 4:55 PM, Roman Shpount wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Ron
> <ron@debian.org<mailto:ron@debian.org>> wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013
> at 03:04:31PM -0500, Roman Shpount wrote:
>> I think it would be beneficial to have a place on openh264 site
>> where the site owners (Cisco) would specifically ask any third
>> party to disclose their IPR claims against this implementation.
>
> We so far can't even get the organisations who have active
> contributors in this WG and which hold H.264 patents to comply with
> their obligations for disclosure under the IETF requirements.[1]
>
> Why would you expect a note on a Cisco website to work any better?
>
>
> If I am getting sued by somebody for IPR violation due to use of
> Cisco binary and if there is a place where the person suing me could
> announce that this binary violates their IPR rights, but failed to do
> so, I can use it in my defense that they never tried to informed me
> and this is form of entrapment. IANAL, but from experience this
> helps.
>
> At least active WG contributors are not suing me yet. _____________
> Roman Shpount
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org<mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>


-- 
~enyst

"Excuse me, Professor Lessig, but may I ask you to sign this CLA, so
that we have legally your permission to distribute your CC-licensed words?"
   ~ Permission Culture, take two.