[rtcweb] H.264 IPR status (RE: VP8 litigation in Germany?)

<Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com> Tue, 12 March 2013 14:20 UTC

Return-Path: <Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73AAC21F8B4C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 07:20:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.579
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.579 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.020, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BEar6PDZyVKY for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 07:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgw-da02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FC0921F8B4A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 07:20:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com (in-mx.nokia.com []) by mgw-da02.nokia.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id r2CEJL7p029355; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:19:24 +0200
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([]) by vaebh104.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:19:21 +0200
Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com ([]) by 008-AM1MMR1-006.mgdnok.nokia.com ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.011; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:19:21 +0000
From: Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com
To: ted.ietf@gmail.com
Thread-Topic: H.264 IPR status (RE: VP8 litigation in Germany?)
Thread-Index: Ac4fK/aknXH8NmqKSZOHVHXjAHrRYg==
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:19:21 +0000
Message-ID: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7623BC147@008-AM1MPN1-042.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Mar 2013 14:19:21.0879 (UTC) FILETIME=[975CDA70:01CE1F2C]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: [rtcweb] H.264 IPR status (RE: VP8 litigation in Germany?)
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: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:20:06 -0000

Hi Ted,

Ted Hardie wrote:
>> What comes to H.264, the Nokia IPR related to that has been disclosed
>> to those SDOs where that codec has been developed, except for the RTP
>> payload format that is in the IETF. I assume all that is publicly
>> available to interested parties. If I recall correctly, some pointers were
>floating around prior to IETF 85. > I'm sure others on this list know that side
>better than me.
>Hi Markus,
>Thanks for the clarification.  I could not find the pointers that you mention; if
>you could provide a URL to the patent list and license terms, that would be
>very useful.  I understand you have already said that this would be some
>flavor of RAND, but the working group comments seem to indicate folks want
>to see the actual license text if that is available.

Please see the URLs posted earlier today by Harald and Stephan, and the summary of H.264 IPR situation by Stephan. Are you asking for this about Nokia specifically, or for all of the H.264 proponents (several affiliations) or for H.264 in general? Nokia is certainly no special case in that context. 

I have gotten the impression that H.264's IPR status is relatively clear enough for the WG participants to form their opinion about it. But if something more would *really* be useful, I think the proponets could try do dig it out.