Re: [rtcweb] Google statement on codecs

["David Benham (dbenham)" <[e-mail]>]

Justin

When one receives/signs the MPEG-LA license for the H264 AVC pool, all of the patents (about 8 pages worth) are listed so that the licensee knows what they are covered for and what they are not.



However, am not able to find a list of patents currently licensable/owned by Google that are included in the royalty free VP8 bitstream spec or implementation license from Google.    Can or has Google published the list of patents minimally covered by your VP8 licenses?



With that info, given adopter’s experts could make a risk assessment as to what might exist but *not* be covered by the VP8 license from Google.



From: Justin Uberti [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2012 5:15 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Harald Alvestrand
Subject: [rtcweb] Google statement on codecs

We believe that the WebRTC effort represents an unprecedented opportunity to establish a new real-time communications platform. Like the web platform, it is built on freely available components, providing state-of-the-art quality to all developers, big or small, with no need for technology licensing. This approach has worked wonders for the web, and we hope for the same result with WebRTC.

Therefore, we believe the sole mandatory-to-implement video codec in WebRTC should be VP8, the only viable royalty-free option. We believe it provides superior quality, which is why we are increasingly using it in our own products. We are also strongly committed to the future of VP8; we continue to invest heavily in its development, and we have a clear record of vigorously defending our technology.

On the audio side, we believe that Opus should be the default mandatory-to-implement audio codec, assuming the remaining licensing issues can be resolved. Opus delivers excellent quality,  from narrowband to fullband, for streaming and realtime, making it an ideal choice for a baseline codec. We also recommend that G.711 be mandatory, for compatibility with the vast universe of PSTN equipment.

Given the ability to deliver a royalty-free platform with no compromises on quality, we see no reason to include mandatory royalty-bearing codecs.