IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com> Mon, 08 December 2014 05:16 UTC

Return-Path: <aallen@blackberry.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 317561A6EDE for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 21:16:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=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 bU68QKttDBG8 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 21:16:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-p02.blackberry.com (smtp-p02.blackberry.com [208.65.78.89]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418BF1A6EF0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Dec 2014 21:16:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xct105cnc.rim.net ([10.65.161.205]) by mhs215cnc.rim.net with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 08 Dec 2014 00:16:10 -0500
Received: from XMB122CNC.rim.net ([fe80::28c6:fa1c:91c6:2e23]) by XCT105CNC.rim.net ([fe80::d13d:b7a2:ae5e:db06%16]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 00:16:08 -0500
From: Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)
Thread-Index: AQHQDyew2za5sQikUES+QP80tOoCX5x+j7gAgAAgMwCAAChyAIAADcQAgAAeaYCAAKv2gIAB/3mAgAAErgCAAFtGa4ACm1OAgAADVACAAAuIYA==
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 05:16:08 +0000
Message-ID: <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD23399895AF@XMB122CNC.rim.net>
References: <547511DB.5050100@nostrum.com> <54759A4C.6020806@gmail.com> <5476092D.4010406@nostrum.com> <15EF2452-2C2C-420B-B972-C37EACE57850@apple.com> <547F60A8.3080302@alvestrand.no> <27F838F1-326D-48BD-B553-6FE993E5C34F@apple.com> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AADF354465@XMB111CNC.rim.net> <547FA924.3000504@mozilla.com> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AADF35455C@XMB111CNC.rim.net> <548052E7.1050007@alvestrand.no> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AADF359C76@XMB111CNC.rim.net> <548203E2.90602@nostrum.com> <20141206054017.5955730.89689.3585@blackberry.com> <CAD5OKxtnQDkKQOohVFdQ1n5+2GU7rjHNjsUH4r3Scv_kc7y6UA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD5OKxtjafk9VCu9SCxX42wqiqLRSS6gX=CwRKmUhAqirr6Uvg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxtjafk9VCu9SCxX42wqiqLRSS6gX=CwRKmUhAqirr6Uvg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.65.160.252]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD23399895AFXMB122CNCrimnet_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/ukKGr2ClJ-A0AdlqXjnYJEY-dmU
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: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 05:16:24 -0000

Roman

I don’t think that proves anything.

Any basic military doctrine on the tactics of ambush is going to state that you don’t go after the lead elements especially if they are the stronger armored elements that are most capable of beating back the attack – no you bide your time and wait until the follow on troops that are far less able to withstand the attack come along and then mount your assault – ripping them to shreads and thus leaving those more powerful lead elements cut off and surrounded with no path to retreat!

Andrew

From: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Roman Shpount
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2014 11:41 AM
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Finishing up the Video Codec document, MTI (again, still, sorry)

There were a lot of arguments here about the Nokia IPR declaration regarding VP8. IANAL, but typically there is a very simple way to determine the validity of the IPR claim. It comes down to one simple question -- Have the party claiming IPR violation filed the law suite? If not, their claims most likely do not justify the court filing fees in their own eyes. Mozilla and Google have been shipping browsers with VP8 codec support for several years already and Nokia did not do a single thing to stop this. If Nokia is serious about their IPR claims, they should take the alleged violators to court. At least this way there is going to be a definitive decision regarding the validity of these claims.

_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email