Re: [video-codec] Charter update

[Basil Mohamed Gohar <[e-mail]>]

This is my first time reading through the proposed charter, and I think 
it's quite good as is (for whatever value that has coming from me).  
However, and I know this was hinted at in its existing form, I would 
like to propose language that would explicitly include a goal of 
enabling support within free and open-source software implementations, 
as opposed to the more general language from BCP 79, which states it 
must "be widely implemented and easily distributed among application 
developers, service operators, and end users."  I believe there there 
could exist solutions that satisfy the condition quoted from BCP 79 and 
yet would not be implementable in free software applications.

The beauty of this kind of a stipulation is that it does not rule out 
the usage of the produced codec in non-free applications, as qualifying 
as free software doesn't have to include exclusion from less-open 
software applications.

I know that that is what is intended by using the language above as a 
guideline, and attempts to address known barriers to free software 
implementation, such as following IETF's IPR guidelines, are already 
being explicitly invoked.  But I think it is not a remote possibility 
that a solution can be found that could theoretically pose problems to 
implementations in free software projects and applications.  Having 
explicit language making that as a goal would protect from exactly such 
a scenario.  I believe it can be placed in the explanative text for the 
above-quoted line as part of the WG's understanding of the phrase, 
"...be widely implemented and easily distributed...".

I propose something along the lines of what follows (changed as 
appropriate for charter-worthiness):

- A successful codec must be permitted, whether legally or otherwise, to 
be implemented in free and open source software applications without 
compromising the licenses under which such applications are distributed.

I know that that is rather clunky, but the meaning of what I was trying 
to get across is conveyed, hopefully.  At the very least, I hope further 
discussion on whether this is even needed to ensure the stated goals can 
occur.

-- 
Libre Video
http://librevideo.org