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