IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs

Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org> Fri, 17 August 2012 20:08 UTC

Return-Path: <basilgohar@librevideo.org>
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 B3C8611E80F1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xjh49540iJOc for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.zaytoon.hidayahonline.net (zaytoon.hidayahonline.net [173.193.202.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C5C11E80EF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.10.40.98] (rrcs-98-103-138-67.central.biz.rr.com [98.103.138.67]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: basilgohar@librevideo.org) by mail.zaytoon.hidayahonline.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6D63D656FFA for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:08:42 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <502EA4C7.5050407@librevideo.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:08:39 -0400
From: Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <9E2843EA-EBB9-40B3-898C-6B5216FAE7A5@cisco.com> <000801cd7c06$2de34710$89a9d530$@us> <CACrD=+_g1FVmJZFM5OY4d=zWLv=31BFXtSfYUyJB7K3urf3bbg@mail.gmail.com> <001901cd7c19$03abf4c0$0b03de40$@us>
In-Reply-To: <001901cd7c19$03abf4c0$0b03de40$@us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
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: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 20:08:43 -0000

On 08/16/2012 09:38 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:
> SOOO WRONG .. just do a simple search.  It just hasn't been fully litigated
> ...yet.
It's impossible for something to be fully litigated.  Even someone
licensing H.264 through MPEG-LA is liable to be sued, as Motorola has
taught us, and the promises from the cartel hold no guarantees for their
future.

The condition you are placing on VP8 is impossible to meet and falsely
assumed to apply to H.264.  What is real is that H.264 has a licensing
situation that excludes implementation in a free software context in
most places of the world that will use it, and VP8 does not.

Now, this is a discussion about the audio codecs, but FUD is FUD and
needs to be nipped in the bud.

v2.19.0 | Report a Bug | By Email