Re: [rtcweb] Cisco to open source its H.264 implementation and absorb MPEG-LA licensing fees

[Roman Shpount <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Ron <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:04:31PM -0500, Roman Shpount wrote:
> > I think it would be beneficial to have a place on openh264 site where the
> > site owners (Cisco) would specifically ask any third party to disclose
> > their IPR claims against this implementation.
>
> We so far can't even get the organisations who have active contributors
> in this WG and which hold H.264 patents to comply with their obligations
> for disclosure under the IETF requirements.[1]
>
> Why would you expect a note on a Cisco website to work any better?
>
>
If I am getting sued by somebody for IPR violation due to use of Cisco
binary and if there is a place where the person suing me could announce
that this binary violates their IPR rights, but failed to do so, I can use
it in my defense that they never tried to informed me and this is form of
entrapment. IANAL, but from experience this helps.

At least active WG contributors are not suing me yet.
_____________
Roman Shpount