Re: [rtcweb] H.261

Daniel-Constantin Mierla <> Fri, 22 November 2013 20:22 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E47201AE28D for <>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 12:22:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
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 ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NPq0x7q8VCiU for <>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 12:22:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c01::236]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE6341AE022 for <>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 12:22:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id o10so932770eaj.41 for <>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 12:22:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uYc9dYbfROG/tKtImWrvktQuRIvKS7eFGL17FbwmSsc=; b=qLI9Lgfq9WPf9K8zc8jKl3uwFrrGmPt3FwrmESKNAb/04SxwiskWtroI182fpQRIw3 Du8n3TMq4N/vbKdv71A/j2GXjEQq6yL17Vs46RwM3fdL5+iK9ilsMi/+dSzTk7fx90a6 xar1eGPZ4cK8kE6VtzOuyJyTswG/46UTHz6cICuOUQnybCkQJtCTo4d4GIHhYLW1UTDx 55CDjAT/E+HPo1PcE0GWfTpHQAdrWSp1hLq77B8sDp4H15sd6Y5A3P3FKlA5UhsjSjyJ Ij/CzAHwebrLFZIOoz4gYAD0vSxue+Z2ZIgR+rCc5B67jBkAZ+wJHcMDto8H8b59gmVx rQhQ==
X-Received: by with SMTP id j41mr3969906eey.41.1385151766235; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 12:22:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id x4sm80039619eef.1.2013. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 22 Nov 2013 12:22:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 21:22:43 +0100
From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:25.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/25.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stefan Slivinski <>, Maik Merten <>, "" <>
References: <> <20131122171020.GY3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] H.261
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 20:22:56 -0000

On 11/22/13 9:11 PM, Stefan Slivinski wrote:
> As I'm sure everyone in this group is aware, Cisco has provided an open source implementation of H.264 and they will cover the patent licensing fees.  Seems like this would be a good option for the little guys worried about dealing with the mpeg-la
Maybe you haven't understood the Cisco deal either -- they are not 
covering the license for the open source version, only for the binary 
version that one has to always download from cisco. They plan to release 
the sources under BSD, but who wants to use them directly, they have to 
deal with mpeg-la.

I am sure if you go back to archive and read the discussion, you will 
find all these (and even more) aspects that makes Cisco offer unfeasible 
in many situations.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel-Constantin Mierla []
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 11:59 AM
> To: Stefan Slivinski; Maik Merten;
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] H.261
> On 11/22/13 8:30 PM, Stefan Slivinski wrote:
>> No, this is taking things to extremes.  This codec hasn't been used in any industry for 15 years.  The entire video conferencing industry uses H.264, the broadcast industry uses H.264, the streaming video industry uses H.264, facetime, skype both use H.264.  The list goes on and on.  There is not a single company is existence today using H.261 over H.264 because of patent fears.  It is asinine that this is even being discussed.
> You misunderstood the issue. h264 has already an incompatible licensing policy for many situations, especially towards open source. Not using
> h264 is not about fears of new patents, but because of the conditions imposed by exiting patents.
> The vp8 vs h261 is actually the case when today none of them has a known/final incompatible license, but of course, the future is not known. Against vp8 there are some claims, but none with a final decision in court (some already dismissed in early stages).
> Daniel
> --
> Daniel-Constantin Mierla -!/miconda -

Daniel-Constantin Mierla -!/miconda -