Re: [rtcweb] H.261

Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> Sun, 24 November 2013 17:04 UTC

Return-Path: <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
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 222BB1ADFAC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 09:04:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.075
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.075 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.525] 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 hiAvyH9UuSmt for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 09:04:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ka.mail.enyo.de (ka.mail.enyo.de [87.106.162.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A36A1ADF0F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 09:04:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.17.135.4] (helo=deneb.enyo.de) by ka.mail.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) id 1Vkd6x-0001gJ-Jq; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:04:43 +0100
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <fw@deneb.enyo.de>) id 1Vkd6x-0001uG-Fv; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:04:43 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
References: <CEB4350B.1E7B2%mzanaty@cisco.com> <20131122171020.GY3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66AF@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528F9DAD.3030300@googlemail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66DE@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FAAA8.8060807@googlemail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66FE@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FB79F.8090405@gmail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E670F@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FBD13.5040801@gmail.com> <528FD429.7090002@nostrum.com> <20131123013935.6690a07a@rainpc> <529009A0.5050708@nostrum.com> <20131123120816.0bc16a75@rainpc> <52910465.8010205@nostrum.com> <20131123215300.4fd6e2c3@rainpc> <CABcZeBNAUhp2O3XeCNFnOMTh5H1jhyjQ225HExRfNUc=8HKvmA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 18:04:43 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNAUhp2O3XeCNFnOMTh5H1jhyjQ225HExRfNUc=8HKvmA@mail.gmail.com> (Eric Rescorla's message of "Sat, 23 Nov 2013 13:12:19 -0800")
Message-ID: <87pppp91ec.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] H.261
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: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:04:57 -0000

* Eric Rescorla:

> Seriously? May I ask whether you have read the summary terms at:
> http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Documents/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf
>
> They seem relatively clear on this point:
> "(a decoder, encoder, or product consisting of one decoder and one encoder
> = “unit”)"
>
> More importantly, do you seriously think anyone would license H.264 for
> a product if you had to pay $.10 every time the product started up.

It's unclear if a WebRTC application that is distributed on demand
would fall into that category if it is capable of using H.264.  The
MPEG LA licensing scheme was devised when this kind of use was not
common.  Also note the lack of reference to mobile devices.

It's also not clear what kind of license commercial use of H.264-based
WebRTC applications by end users would need.  They don't fall into
either of the top-level category.

(The fact that MPEG LA is apparently not structured in a way that
enables it to grant clearcut licenses to commercial users of
videoconferencing solutions doesn't mean they are exempted from
obtaining licenses.)