- From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
- Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 10:09:05 -0400
- To: Chiariglione Leonardo <Leonardo.Chiariglione@TILAB.COM>
- cc: "'Rob Lanphier'" <robla@real.com>, discuss@apps.ietf.org
I think the point is that it's much easier to make a standard accessible to everyone if the standard is *designed* to minimize reliance on encumbered IPR. If ISO cannot do that, that's quite unfortunate. IETF's rules are slightly different - the organization cannot make a determiniation about the validity of IPR, but individuals within IETF are free to discuss such things and make their own decisions to contribute (or not) to a consensus based on such things. MPEG-4 might eventually reach the point where licensing isn't difficult for those who have money to pay lawyers and purchase licenses. That still leaves free software developers out of the picture. Experience shows that free software developers have often been a major force in deploying a new technology on the network - thus creating a market for commercial developers, while providing near-zero-cost implementations to those who cannot or prefer not to pay for them. Cutting out the free software developers therefore makes it much less likely that MPEG-4 will be widely deployed. Of course, nobody can use MPEG-4 until the licensing issues are worked out. Making lawyers part of the critical path for deployment of MPEG-4 doesn't seem wise either. how many more weights does this thing need until it sinks of its own accord? Keith
Received on Sunday, 1 April 2001 10:09:33 UTC