Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)

David Singer <singer@apple.com> Thu, 04 December 2014 19:17 UTC

Return-Path: <singer@apple.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 3CC2B1A00AD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:17:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.311
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 hS7xiwvmvkap for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:17:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-in2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.151.62.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13FE91A0079 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:17:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1417720642; x=2281634242; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=8CMHdUM8Z7kx3tqcFEFOyCdrxa9wWo7HPSOryyObDks=; b=Av0OWrz1seTjBsu1T3cK7IGcZ+AP6AhT1SXwU5YfM9vYVffrwxqQru0IwUT40BOY 6FmgXGNjv2wLoN2V15tjC45ySUwvbYOQW+Jepw0Db+h/IzUD5AWpBM/bARMREfZf Hdz1rDITFZpFNLZV1eE39dvwngaZhLduUYe7wgRJxwOHAIy6QCNPAajAB2/cPt0/ jdqsbbuce/wGiCCYq5dI/QAM/O3i5Jzt2rAkBsl9fpw5GcfN3fsrxxzA8OOhRqBo nH312qGc3G8DYCKN27MWsiyPQxrXW6ws1dMwSfisdNkteXfv0vqEJUkXC6O5ZLtA AIKBMvMkc1PqQ+ulU72+aw==;
Received: from relay5.apple.com (relay5.apple.com [17.128.113.88]) by mail-in2.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id FD.1C.26546.243B0845; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:17:22 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11973e11-f79af6d0000067b2-ae-5480b342d49c
Received: from marigold.apple.com (marigold.apple.com [17.128.115.132]) (using TLS with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay5.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id F6.27.06123.443B0845; Thu, 4 Dec 2014 11:17:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from singda.apple.com (singda.apple.com [17.201.24.241]) by marigold.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.30.0 64bit (built Oct 22 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NG200273O8YQP60@marigold.apple.com> for rtcweb@ietf.org; Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:17:22 -0800 (PST)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <20141204145138.GH10449@hex.shelbyville.oz>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:17:21 -0800
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Message-id: <15016A8B-67BA-40B8-9273-F8CEEBB6869C@apple.com>
References: <547511DB.5050100@nostrum.com> <54759A4C.6020806@gmail.com> <5476092D.4010406@nostrum.com> <15EF2452-2C2C-420B-B972-C37EACE57850@apple.com> <20141204145138.GH10449@hex.shelbyville.oz>
To: Ron <ron@debian.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FAYoeu0uSHE4NE8LYu1/9rZHRg9liz5 yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVcXbnD8aCDp6KR6f+MTYwnufsYuTkkBAwkVjbPYEdwhaTuHBv PVsXIxeHkMBeRomJfdeZYYp+XbkHlZjEJPHyZhszhDOfSeLprEamLkYODmYBdYkpU3JBGngF 9CSanjxmArGFBSIkjnSeAdvAJqAq8WDOMUYQm1PAQmLPuRWsIDYLUHz9rf1gcWYBYYnvj++x QNjaEk/eXWCFmGkj8W3Jb3aIvScZJTrvPgVbICIgIfHm/WOoS2Ul/l08A1YkIfCWVeLW4t2M ExiFZyHcNwvJfbOQ7FjAyLyKUSg3MTNHNzPPSC+xoCAnVS85P3cTIyiQp9sJ7mA8vsrqEKMA B6MSD2/h7voQIdbEsuLK3EOM0hwsSuK8bPUNIUIC6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmpxYcYmTg4pRoY KzLW7jYMZ72VFB74d6N/g/fNgyZh9xJ9ypuZeR8tbpkQ6nSyXPSU+aGuI++LP/6bqmv5JT3q DPMtjjsHLrfK+x5cLCSz8WSfM3td5va7vhuik53OWhx2+cB/v3Vl09WM8Nz9Df96Ojczb5v9 w800V/KeYmPSxZ2vw3t0tzVYn24+cPtlYTC3EktxRqKhFnNRcSIAgMd3PUUCAAA=
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FDcouuyuSHE4NQkeYu1/9rZHRg9liz5 yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVcXbnD8aCDp6KR6f+MTYwnufsYuTkkBAwkfh15R4bhC0mceHe eiCbi0NIYBKTxMubbcwQznwmiaezGpm6GDk4mAXUJaZMyQVp4BXQk2h68pgJxBYWiJA40nmG HcRmE1CVeDDnGCOIzSlgIbHn3ApWEJsFKL7+1n6wOLOAsMT3x/dYIGxtiSfvLrBCzLSR+Lbk NzvE3pOMEp13n4ItEBGQkHjz/jEzxKWyEv8unmGfwCgwC+GkWUhOmoVk7AJG5lWMAkWpOYmV pnqJBQU5qXrJ+bmbGMGBVxixg/H/MqtDjAIcjEo8vAW760OEWBPLiitzDzFKcDArifCeWNcQ IsSbklhZlVqUH19UmpNafIhRmoNFSZy3KhuoWiA9sSQ1OzW1ILUIJsvEwSnVwLhm3qmv8hys hj2fFs44kTqJO2yzfNvE2wwzgoXFbj8V8FCIyJFLbCzcKDffTzPQttLsoa/uFvVXIWxhb+45 R7Rq5foyiy1afFvXV3SLzETj8uTSKM4900ITd/8x07u5UvTjzVnZ1vu/q3RtmBxvVdLvqPp8 4gdPJctFHAeEn1VYvPNeGyYho8RSnJFoqMVcVJwIAAGC+9I4AgAA
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/bFylXQlDm7km1hfqi5FXLFkt6oc
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)
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: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 19:17:24 -0000

> On Dec 4, 2014, at 6:51 , Ron <ron@debian.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 10:33:04AM -0800, David Singer wrote:
>> 
>> Consider finally: a small company for whom WebRTC is important.
>> 
>> Let’s look at the choices:
>> 
>> 1.  Follow the mandate, implement VP8, and risk a ruinous lawsuit from Nokia.
>> 
>> 2.  Reject the mandate, do not implement VP8, and be formally therefore not conformant and therefore not in receipt of a license from company X; risk a ruinous lawsuit from X.
>> 
>> 3.  Do not implement WebRTC, and risk a ruinous loss of relevance.
> 
> This seems more like a hypothetical small strawman than a situation
> that any *real* small company has expressed to this group.
> 
> Your concern for small operators is heartwarming, but I think if you
> consult the list archives to see what such people have actually said
> for themselves, the only ruinous legal barrier that Nokia appears to
> have them worried about is the IPR it holds on H.264 that is outside
> the pool MPEG-LA operates, with no clear guarantee of its terms.
> 
> And we *still* don't have an IPR statement from them about this.
> How many times should we need to ask them to respect the IETF process?

I’m sorry, is H.264 a specification in progress at the IETF? You will find declarations from them at ISO, IEC, and ITU, I think. They state (as I recall) RAND.  (Not “unwilling to license”.)

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.