Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> Wed, 27 November 2013 15:22 UTC

Return-Path: <stewe@stewe.org>
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 D8B4B1AC862 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:22:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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 BOhhz29MvDPY for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:22:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1lp0151.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.151]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BFC31AC829 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 07:22:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from CO1PR07MB363.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.141.75.22) by CO1PR07MB364.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.141.75.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.820.5; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:22:29 +0000
Received: from CO1PR07MB363.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.3.35]) by CO1PR07MB363.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.3.113]) with mapi id 15.00.0820.005; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:22:28 +0000
From: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process
Thread-Index: AQHO5tnk2wfNffVCI02rNFBZREEO/pov+9iAgAACNgCAAAr/gIAABK+AgAAYwYCAAAHxAIAAAPyAgAARmQCAAAD1AIAAMeGAgAAE/oCAAAJigIAACkAAgAABfoCAAAGeAIAAAhYAgAEo7oCAABXKAIAAGmOAgAdVVYD//4IDgA==
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:22:27 +0000
Message-ID: <CEBB4C1B.AAFBD%stewe@stewe.org>
References: <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA8AD7ED@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <E62E1CAF-546D-4A0E-9339-D03D6C0BC1AE@apple.com> <528EBAB0.2010906@librevideo.org> <D125BF97-73BE-4591-8C70-30C03974CC78@apple.com> <528EBD4C.8070504@librevideo.org> <CAOJ7v-2zCZk4cMh1MbpXGHCELJMJppLVEX9CwPG3VNtDfDv4qw@mail.gmail.com> <02B96CE8-A6D9-4288-B052-FB54B07447FB@apple.com> <528FCA68.2070309@googlemail.com> <528FE08B.1020908@nostrum.com> <B9742C9B-B3E4-40D6-B1DA-D6E2611D00BD@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <B9742C9B-B3E4-40D6-B1DA-D6E2611D00BD@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [75.60.27.131]
x-forefront-prvs: 004395A01C
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(24454002)(479174003)(377454003)(51704005)(199002)(189002)(74366001)(36756003)(81816001)(76786001)(2656002)(87936001)(51856001)(50986001)(81342001)(54356001)(81542001)(76482001)(81686001)(46102001)(15975445006)(53806001)(56816003)(76796001)(56776001)(85306002)(80976001)(83072001)(15202345003)(74706001)(74876001)(4396001)(77982001)(19580405001)(59766001)(83322001)(19580395003)(65816001)(80022001)(66066001)(63696002)(79102001)(49866001)(74662001)(69226001)(47976001)(87266001)(54316002)(74502001)(31966008)(77096001)(47736001)(47446002)(6234004)(42262001)(16940595002); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:CO1PR07MB364; H:CO1PR07MB363.namprd07.prod.outlook.com; CLIP:75.60.27.131; FPR:; RD:InfoNoRecords; A:0; MX:1; LANG:en;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <239F0E8A3CCE5542854C3BC70FD5DEF2@namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: stewe.org
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process
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: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:22:38 -0000

Cullen,
You missed the patent term adjustment of 487 days in this case--a very
short adjustment period for a video coding patent (see note on over page
right below the assignees).  Note that this PTA is occasionally adjusted
upwards after printing of the cover page (quite often actually for
standards essential cases), which is recorded in the file wrapper and
usually (but not always) in a certificate of correction.
The patent in question is currently being litigated in an MPEG-2 context,
and I have heard that the question of PTA has come up (though I do not
know any details).
Stephan

 


On 11.27.2013, 06:53 , "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>; wrote:

>
>Adam, thought I agree with your meta point about submarine patents
>existed in the past, I don' think you have this quite right on the
>details on this one.
>
>For US patents applications filed prior to June 8, 1995, the term is
>either 17 years from date of issue or 20 years from earliest priority
>date, whichever is later. For applications filed after June 8, 1995, the
>term is 20 years from the earliest priority date.
>
>Given this was filed after 1995, it expires 20 years after the priority
>date so it expired in 2012.
>
>
>
>On Nov 22, 2013, at 3:54 PM, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>; wrote:
>
>> On 11/22/13 15:19, Maik Merten wrote:
>>> It is hard to come up with a scenario where patents covering the
>>>original standard and original reference implementation would still be
>>>enforceable. 
>> 
>> As a specific example of such a scenario -- one that is tantalizingly
>>close to the subject at hand -- look here:
>> 
>> http://www.google.com/patents/US7376184
>> 
>> Read the first paragraph of the description. In layman's terms, it says
>>"even though this patent is being issued in 2008, we claim that it was
>>invented in January of 1992." And with a priority date prior to 1995,
>>this means that they have protection for seventeen years from the date
>>of issuance (i.e., until 2025).
>> 
>> Yes, this means that they have patent protection on this specific
>>technique for 33 years after its invention.
>> 
>> In US courts, this is 100% legal and fully enforceable, since they
>>started the process prior to 1995. And "prior to 1995" is exactly when
>>we're talking about.
>> 
>> /a
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>_______________________________________________
>rtcweb mailing list
>rtcweb@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb