Re: [rtcweb] Google VP8 Patent Grant for third parties [Was Re:Proposal for H.263 baseline codec]

"Olle E. Johansson" <> Thu, 12 April 2012 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F0F21F86A2 for <>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:21:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZP9TIG3tgSa6 for <>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:21:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a02:920:212e::205]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B17B21F86DA for <>; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9C925754A8BB; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:21:42 +0000 (UTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: "Olle E. Johansson" <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 18:21:40 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <03ac01cd120d$0ffe95f0$2ffbc1d0$> <> <03e301cd1223$153e6b60$3fbb4220$> <> <007b01cd12f7$fbcd72e0$f36858a0$> <> <> <>
To: "Kevin P. Fleming" <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Google VP8 Patent Grant for third parties [Was Re:Proposal for H.263 baseline codec]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 16:21:53 -0000

12 apr 2012 kl. 18:09 skrev Kevin P. Fleming:

> On 04/12/2012 02:21 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>> This is really bad news for Open Source. Even if we try to get a way to pay for licenses, our business model is far away from understandable for most of the syndicates. I tried with the AMR codec once and it stopped at initial order quantity. Anything under 10.000 licenses was not up for discussion.
>> G.729 is available on one-by-one basis which both Asterisk and FreeSwitch sell to users... I have no insight into how these agreements was worked out, but it at least indicates that someone tries to open up.
> It is my understanding that the licensing arrangements that have been made for G.729 are no longer an option for new licensees (not offered by the consortium), and to my knowledge such arrangements have never been an option for any of the other voice/video codecs that our customers have asked us about (including H.264, the AMR family and others).

And isn't that a shame. The question here for the legal department is wether Google's policies in regards to VP8 is enough for companies like you to work with it in either binary addons or Open Source code? Does it provide enough liability assurance?

I think that question is where we are right now.

If not, will Google try to offer a solution?