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

Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com> Thu, 12 April 2012 07:03 UTC

Return-Path: <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
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 6098321F84E4 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.615
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.615 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.361, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 7dxbNBSque-H for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ob0-f172.google.com (mail-ob0-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C353421F84B9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by obbtb4 with SMTP id tb4so2674878obb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=softarmor.com; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Tndbk7CbzSaZuo34jbA6hK7cqfEUMAYtXc8whGeFgrY=; b=QpNAwRX+8pgMX8ta0XINU+dmyv9fXgbId5m8PJjJijj4xwugvjHar1nfL/2+Lcv5xp YMVRGDstoWuts/lM6MJKtCVlyhKBUitR/A2J710CPCkxk4xqtM0w+rgpkpRQox6zuqJ2 Oy82dY3OqyRUABg/VesByHSOO9L4WuN4g0/YY=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=Tndbk7CbzSaZuo34jbA6hK7cqfEUMAYtXc8whGeFgrY=; b=MycLFKx4uj17PjS14AvVlR0k6fvsE2F7pyAGQtXaPBt4kKztcIEBG8Dr1Z8rsfoIVA ySJxFvJo0AOkZqU4Ooxbl+EYOlLK+x7dHzW/ZcFt6YsaOZlQJx/NzG8PC/y9HcY/LsYC U8lXHiHhdtMWM1h/oHn1d+49Em5FadOnyGAfeT/zyRCuDwC0/TDkVdPwT7k4KgTkCIpV 3t6QDk/Pn5KtA7BEvk6l7yLBn+ojbCWbuH+7kSWfsCR/v7tG+YZScGaXwDrtMwrcqOXT AISK7bEiHbEUuWAoQwz0v/v8S9pas4cC5WIK0xvrMCYOwgOo4JebNBDd6uk26ZhWpAbQ Mvfw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.4.170 with SMTP id l10mr1467354oel.67.1334214231337; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.60.33.199 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 00:03:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <011e01cd135c$fcdc08d0$f6941a70$@packetizer.com>
References: <CAMKM2Ly-xnVEciL941uOu1Bgwc-wssZ7HNkQuBhsCcgyqfuk5Q@mail.gmail.com> <03ac01cd120d$0ffe95f0$2ffbc1d0$@packetizer.com> <4F7BCD1A.7020508@librevideo.org> <03e301cd1223$153e6b60$3fbb4220$@packetizer.com> <4F7C4FB4.4070703@librevideo.org> <007b01cd12f7$fbcd72e0$f36858a0$@packetizer.com> <4F7DB5DC.40507@mozilla.com> <011e01cd135c$fcdc08d0$f6941a70$@packetizer.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 02:03:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOHm=4tAKA6qimpjfJPmxwm86Y7-UyWGkJP0eeVv7B7TXZu=Vw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
To: "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1f862502a5b04bd75f5ce
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQngHlM4NnZbpAT7LLsbqaqC5mtvcEHJC9KVPJYqQa7ctqa+FoBnA9YUhloyHQ9ibPACA9br
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Google VP8 Patent Grant for third parties [Was Re:Proposal for H.263 baseline codec]
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: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 07:03:52 -0000

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote:

>
> You're ignoring one point I made.  Those involved in the creation of H.264
> have quite likely filed IPR statements with ISO or ITU.  If some other
> company were to come out of the closet on this with something that
> blindsides the industry, the industry would fight it.  At the very least,
> whatever bit of IPR that is claimed would have to be put into perspective
> with respect to the other hundreds of patents on H.264.
>
>
This actually is a good point. Since the existing H.264 claimants gain
revenue therefrom, they are likely to act to protect their share of the
revenue. It's kind of like the local mob keeping outsiders from putting the
squeeze on businesses in their domain.

On the other hand, if I can't afford to "buy in" to their protection racket
up front, my kneecaps might be in trouble.

So do you want a nice safe Northeastern city with a godfather who will make
you an offer you can't refuse, or a Wild West free-for-all with a mix of
hard working frontiersmen, militant ranch-barons, drunken cowboys, and the
occasional marauding aborigine?

Different strokes for different folks, I think.

--
Dean