Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec
Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> Thu, 29 March 2012 14:53 UTC
Return-Path: <stewe@stewe.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 5B06221E80AC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 07:53:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.786
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.786 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.187, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 pbWfD7bZd+Oy for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 07:53:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (am1ehsobe002.messaging.microsoft.com [213.199.154.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DCDC21E80C5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 07:53:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail59-am1-R.bigfish.com (10.3.201.237) by AM1EHSOBE006.bigfish.com (10.3.204.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:09 +0000
Received: from mail59-am1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail59-am1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C683240521; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-SpamScore: -24
X-BigFish: PS-24(z11d7lzbb2dI9371I41c5N98dKzz1202h1082kzz1033IL8275dhz2fh2a8h668h839h944h)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.240.133; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); IPV:NLI; H:BL2PRD0710HT003.namprd07.prod.outlook.com; RD:none; EFVD:NLI
Received-SPF: pass (mail59-am1: domain of stewe.org designates 157.56.240.133 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.240.133; envelope-from=stewe@stewe.org; helo=BL2PRD0710HT003.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ; .outlook.com ;
Received: from mail59-am1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail59-am1 (MessageSwitch) id 1333032786996525_15970; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from AM1EHSMHS013.bigfish.com (unknown [10.3.201.235]) by mail59-am1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5BE6A0059; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from BL2PRD0710HT003.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (157.56.240.133) by AM1EHSMHS013.bigfish.com (10.3.207.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:05 +0000
Received: from BL2PRD0710MB349.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.2.179]) by BL2PRD0710HT003.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.102.38]) with mapi id 14.16.0135.002; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:04 +0000
From: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
To: Basil Mohamed Gohar <basilgohar@librevideo.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec
Thread-Index: AQHNDaWq9kefa/omnUePrLHPwXaly5aBQduAgAAyeID//9/OgIAAKWCA
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:03 +0000
Message-ID: <CB9A41D4.853AB%stewe@stewe.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F7470B7.9090202@librevideo.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.255.102.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <60F2425599A08547A7B5CA88AFA89420@namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: stewe.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline 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: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:53:18 -0000
On 3.29.2012 16:24 , "Basil Mohamed Gohar" <basilgohar@librevideo.org> wrote: >On 03/29/2012 10:20 AM, Stephan Wenger wrote: >> The second part of your sentence may or may not be true, depending on >>your >> relationship with google, your willingness to use the webm >>implementation >> in unchanged form, and other factors. Please see the webm license >> conditions, which AFAIK can be found here: >> http://www.webmproject.org/license/additional/ >Correct. I think you are referring to this part, explicitly: >> If you or your agent or exclusive licensee institute or order or agree >> to the institution of patent litigation against any entity (including >> a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that this >> implementation of VP8 or any code incorporated within this >> implementation of VP8 constitutes direct or contributory patent >> infringement, or inducement of patent infringement, then any patent >> rights granted to you under this License for this implementation of >> VP8 shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed. >Perhaps I assumed that that is a very reasonable part of the license. >That is, if you are suing someone alleging a patent infringement within >VP8, you are no longer granted the license to use VP8's patented >technologies that Google owns. Yes, that's one issue. Call it personal preference for different type of reciprocity conditions :-) (I could rant about it for hours, but let's continue to pretend that this is mostly a technical mailing list) The other issue, though (the fact that the license grant extends only to the VP8 implementation as provided by google, and does not extent to derivative works such as hardware implementations) should be moderately alarming even for an open source person. With respect to this clause, I will note that I criticized the licensing conditions in private and in public (IETF mike) several times, months ago, and nothing happened. Suggests to me one of three things: (1) google is a large company and decisions take time, or (2) google's legal is currently occupied with other stuff, or (3) that the choice of language is intentional, and intended to prevent forks. Take your pick. Stephan >_______________________________________________ >rtcweb mailing list >rtcweb@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb >
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Basil Mohamed Gohar
- [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Dean Willis
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Lorenzo Miniero
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Piers O'Hanlon
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Paul E. Jones
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Paul E. Jones
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Gregory Maxwell
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Randell Jesup
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Dean Willis
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Kevin P. Fleming
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec Kevin P. Fleming
- Re: [rtcweb] Proposal for H.263 baseline codec David Benham (dbenham)