W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2007

[whatwg] Removal of Ogg is *preposterous*

From: Dave Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:10:33 +0900
Message-ID: <p06240819c384e1e27e51@[10.5.0.225]>
At 13:09  -0500 11/12/07, Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) wrote:
>Fact: Vorbis is the *only* codec whose patent status has been widely
>researched, nearly to exhaustion.

You are clearly completely unaware of the extensive analysis done of 
other codecs, including those that are licensed.

At 14:08  -0500 11/12/07, Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) wrote:
>No, I won't pay.  It's not my problem, and they can foot the bill.  If they
>were wise, they would fund patent reform efforts as the most enduring way to
>prevent these disasters from continually arising.  But they won't because
>they also benefit from the patent racket.

This is getting marginally offensive.  Are you present at the patent 
reform discussions in DC?  Can you state categorically that we were 
not there, or give a precis of our opinion if we were there?  Come 
on, people.  The WhatWG is not going to solve the world-wide patent 
issues.  At least recognize your own limitations.

>
>And even if Apple gets sued for patent infringement, that doesn't mean that
>the suit has merits -- experts already looked at the evidence surrounding
>Vorbis and patentability, and unanimously said "it's clear".

Cool.  Bring them on.  We might even *buy* patent insurance from 
them, who knows?  Money for jam, right?

At 15:12  -0500 11/12/07, Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) wrote:
>And the reason they don't support it is because they have colluded against Ogg
>Vorbis or FLAC because they free consumers from proprietary prisons

Thanks for telling us our own situation and motivation.  I really needed that.

Fact:  we ship standard codecs and container formats.  I took an iPod 
video to a standards meeting 10 days after its introduction and had 
*5* other companies using their own implementations of MP4 file 
format, AAC, and H.264, make files for it that played.  I was and 
remain proud of that;  it demonstrates more than any email how 
committed we are to a multi-vendor, open, world.

At 16:37  -0500 11/12/07, Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) wrote:
>Well, instead of hoping, maybe we can draw more attention to this issue so
>public pressure helps us do the job.

We (whatwg) don't need pressure, as we have general consensus on what 
we desire;  we need work done to find an acceptable solution.
-- 
David Singer
Apple/QuickTime
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 17:10:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:38 UTC