Re: [rtcweb] One consuming project's concerns with OpenH264 as a MTI codec

Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org> Wed, 06 November 2013 22:48 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 D332021E818E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:48:04 -0800 (PST)
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=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FJtFSdCljJZn for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:47:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.zaytoon.hidayahonline.net (zaytoon.hidayahonline.net [173.193.202.83]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACAA821E8170 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.10.40.120] (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 F283E65A461; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 17:47:50 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <527AC713.2020606@librevideo.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 17:47:47 -0500
From: Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org>
Organization: Libre Video
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)" <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
References: <20131106211149.GA1763@unaka.lan> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A4843D48AD5F@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <20131106214121.GB1763@unaka.lan> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A4843D48AED6@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A4843D48AED6@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] One consuming project's concerns with OpenH264 as a MTI codec
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: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 22:48:05 -0000

On 11/06/2013 05:40 PM, Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) wrote:
> An interesting definition, to be sure.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Matthew Kaufman

VP8 is not encumbered by patents because that patents that are known
about are granted by Google and via Google's deal with MPEG-LA.  Nokia's
threats have failed in Germany, so there remains no known encumbrance
against VP8.

The encumbrance of patents is due to their usage to restrict
free-and-open-usage of technology, which the patents on VP8 do not.  The
same cannot be said to any degree for H.264.

-- 
Libre Video
http://librevideo.org