W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-and-tv@w3.org > March 2011

Re: [W3C Web and TV IG] Adaptive streaming MPEG DASH liaison

From: Steve Lhomme <slhomme@matroska.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 10:11:31 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTimi9OtwU_1mV1XzCnFebr7Ts0z=ZiBK4RBJiL=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
Cc: Rob Glidden <rob.glidden@sbcglobal.net>, "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>, Gerard Fernando <gerardmxf@yahoo.co.uk>, "juhani.huttunen@nokia.com" <juhani.huttunen@nokia.com>, "hj08.lee@lge.com" <hj08.lee@lge.com>, "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:
> I also want to say that most of us are not lawyers. I'm uncomfortable with a
> liaison to MPEG using terms like "strict RF policy" and "RF profile" which
> could have legal or other meanings we do not understand. We should just
> state W3C's requirement: "compatibility with the W3C patent policy" and ask
> if DASH can meet that bar. The lawyers can work out what is required for
> that. They are paid well enough.

Which lawyers are we talking about here ? From what I understand MPEG
is not a "creating" entity by itself, but the sum of all its
participants.  So I assume that would be the lawyers of each company
having IPR in DASH. That means each company has a coordinate effort
going in the same direction. That may take a little while. And that's
time wasted on the W3C side waiting for DASH to come out with whatever
they can propose, which may be nothing in the end.

-- 
Steve Lhomme
Matroska association Chairman
Received on Monday, 21 March 2011 09:12:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:02 UTC