IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Tue, 11 November 2014 02:41 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.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 6C4C91A8843 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.972
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.972 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594, 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 6TNFZ3U7V3ST for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yh0-x229.google.com (mail-yh0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 542461A882F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yh0-f41.google.com with SMTP id i57so4012953yha.28 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=mASM/QgQhOG85k+Pwj3LKGpeo/W72757USdvJ3KtceQ=; b=Zh5l6tLOrBM8qa8CB/cK7Od1J9PfYpDSQFS/Xxi8yUhYAxy/9z3i9mTa0TLja0rWmD ZYPQGXfzAoZkv5RvocaPjDxYD21O811dF7+s4XMfoqL9Zqm8L9K8dGMOCCtWfkWnqGbZ f/IP9M1AeT1nXuca9ubOaj8t72Nh7J4kerYBvKCSwkmR0/A93IKEdlsG2g9HDLseBc8F VjxXn1wCZfeDwP51inr3d6NynMbuGT+b/reIxlWSyA8hrOyRT4YKp0MS3hEq6DVF8bE+ Go8X3yGbcEKMuzFfPscgjVJh7loc35B6pGwIpjAKPdqzYyDox6lJFXuLad/HFxObgBvw CvJw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=mASM/QgQhOG85k+Pwj3LKGpeo/W72757USdvJ3KtceQ=; b=CHy0+W7zfzlm9pO0NwIansc+oalHepbjGH6SFzGOCO8Yu94ihnzVWoGmp+Ck1/eeJ7 2RR57rL53upoDtirySqYXsOwpQGQVj75Z6RUXW8hcioBsEws6YfgbSUDEI88H9xZYf06 9OhGXrTsQdEPER7MI+IKTpOHJr+28jUYjl6lQipYGd+1mc3vH+VcZs5vTaUrSnvI38/w +2iYTaHhq8Bb1KNUdPBpYas1W9Jgkh4TFnVUP5M2SYLfnsYz+c0QJEgvR40rNlq8fBMm WGbeomwgKSPco0U9hd9gbsZv5rRExZ91Ew/3eJAX+aZqJDUj43313CvZh1XI2nBSkeph O64w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmKncYhZXFl/akY9q9MEY4ZxYGsXhn8wkTyxdGuzQUEqWdjnnHHUCdEroujT9B2hlGUYN0x
X-Received: by 10.52.163.202 with SMTP id yk10mr3795231vdb.14.1415673681417; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.237.130 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1D5CFB04-2CCB-424C-A364-1CAA05E84D12@apple.com>
References: <54601E19.8080203@nostrum.com> <176316D6-D685-45F4-AA8E-A4F07521CAE4@matthew.at> <1D5CFB04-2CCB-424C-A364-1CAA05E84D12@apple.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:41:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-12aQ6Ds0gZ-S96PiopFoDVQTsad_YoZpiU_mi2fNezuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c22bf0e6395d05078c36fb"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/P9_3bv6kZj8QcfQeKlVCstyrMSY
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal
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: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 02:41:24 -0000

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 3:04 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Nov 10, 2014, at 13:55 , Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at> wrote:
>
> > I cited those three players just as examples of known positions. There
> are several others, of course.
> >
> > This proposal puts the large initial burden of IPR risk and/or cost on
> the browser vendors...
> >
> > I think we would need to know how happy Apple, Google, Microsoft, and
> Mozilla (plus the other major browser vendors ) are with a requirement that
> both H.264 and VP8 be included with their browser and/or operating system.
> >
> > We may be tired of this, but it isn't like we have a royalty-free option
> for H.264 MPEG-LA or IP risk indemnification from Google.. So what's
> changed for the browser makers?
>
> That is my question too;  what has changed since this was (effectively)
> one of the options in the notorious long-ago poll?
>
> On the face of it, this requires proponents of ‘must be free’ to take on a
> non-free license (in principle, though rarely in practice), which is
> unacceptable to them, and for the ‘must be reasonably clear of IPR risk and
> independently implementable’ people to have to take on IPR risk and try (?)
> to implement from the specs, which seems unacceptable to them.
>
>
I'm not sure what you are implying with your comment of "independently
implementable" and parenthetical question mark, but there are multiple
independent implementations of VP8 at this time.

Besides the software implementations in libvpx and ffvp8, there are also
many independent implementations in SoCs from Qualcomm, Nvidia, and
Samsung, amongst others.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email