Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs

Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> Sun, 19 August 2012 02:21 UTC

Return-Path: <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
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 8ADF321F84CE for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LK0NRoGlJcap for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:21:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA14F21F8484 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so5113690vbb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=1O4BkPYKx1t2/Nv9jqJS20KzRrQYcpHQGC8ZLL9kmf4=; b=0ISdJK5oLP0t+NBScNjrXBdRDRKBZ0s2VUrpqUDJuFT/lwjgBcKq9LJy9Bf9x3+Brb 8DVSKgwPRtPDtZ04DnsvGcQDfaX8k1zAOcfrdfE0BXm85xjuqxmQixwirNWPsPdbr7CF H3v4JTbW4LwUPsUL436BvOTX0UaPcpJ5MXBkeugB8IK9oaGmD6Qk9EOtR8O/Jo55ulWA wHSN/apiwKHToG/K6yBzzuT6vRnMdd6GBpehucWxlulmhy2HNSQH0r0D3ytlZ+lxUb9n AljUegHXt00E2xDsfWCAJN09UTVHtEn7DbRB+vow02D1RSN2bdKOQp0mxfmTxhplhFeU NGKA==
Received: by 10.52.100.165 with SMTP id ez5mr5499284vdb.108.1345342873293; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.119.206 with HTTP; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 19:20:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <001e01cd7d6c$f79bdf60$e6d39e20$@us>
References: <9E2843EA-EBB9-40B3-898C-6B5216FAE7A5@cisco.com> <000801cd7c06$2de34710$89a9d530$@us> <CACrD=+_g1FVmJZFM5OY4d=zWLv=31BFXtSfYUyJB7K3urf3bbg@mail.gmail.com> <001901cd7c19$03abf4c0$0b03de40$@us> <502EA4C7.5050407@librevideo.org> <001e01cd7d6c$f79bdf60$e6d39e20$@us>
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 12:20:52 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2=XH9zT8-0WXzohwEgRavQvQo88H8QCMFaF5oieZVjWbQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
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: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 02:21:14 -0000

On that search: did you also notice that it got amazingly quiet since July 2011?
S.

On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us> wrote:
> Well nip on this for a while .. a simple search against "VP8 intellectual
> property issues" brings up some interesting points.  It only takes one suit.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Basil Mohamed Gohar
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 4:09 PM
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
>
> On 08/16/2012 09:38 PM, Richard Shockey wrote:
>> SOOO WRONG .. just do a simple search.  It just hasn't been fully
>> litigated ...yet.
> It's impossible for something to be fully litigated.  Even someone licensing
> H.264 through MPEG-LA is liable to be sued, as Motorola has taught us, and
> the promises from the cartel hold no guarantees for their future.
>
> The condition you are placing on VP8 is impossible to meet and falsely
> assumed to apply to H.264.  What is real is that H.264 has a licensing
> situation that excludes implementation in a free software context in most
> places of the world that will use it, and VP8 does not.
>
> Now, this is a discussion about the audio codecs, but FUD is FUD and needs
> to be nipped in the bud.
> _______________________________________________
> 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