- From: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
- Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:31:23 +0200
- To: Olivier Carmona <ocarmona@awox.com>
- CC: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4DEE0C0B.40001@telecom-paristech.fr>
Olivier, you are perfectly right, I made a big confusion, but not the one you point out. I mistook the acronym "IPR-free" for "royalty-free", sorry about that. The correct sentence was: "We are operating in W3C with royalty-free constraints, so we are not allowed to mandate the use of a royalty-bearing standard such as UPnP." But talking of a "royalty-free implementation" is misleading. If a standard infringes some royalty-bearing IPR, then the use of any conformant implementation will be subject to the payment of royalties. Open source has absolutely nothing to do with IPR and royalties. On 7/6/11 12:14 , Olivier Carmona wrote: > > Dear JC, > > I think that you are confusing several legal notions between royalty > free implementation and intellectual property free. > > First, you say"We are operating in W3C with IPR-free constraints". > This is wrong, W3C operates under royalty-free policy, and this is not > an equivalent of IPR-free policy. > > Second, Bonjour implementation is open source, but not IPR free > (please read > http://developer.apple.com/softwarelicensing/agreements/bonjour.html > and in particular the mention "Regardless of whether your product will > be sold, used internally, or bundled with other products, if you wish > to use Apple software, technologies and/or trademarks, you need to > obtain a license from Apple to do so."). Having a royalty free > implementation, does not forbid Apple to set a royalty for the > intellectual property inside. > > Note that there are also several UPnP implementations that are royalty > free, see for instance GUPnP. > JCD: there are open source implementations (free software) of the video codec H264, but their use is subject to royalties. Best regards JC > > Note that PTP is not IPR-free, not even sure, that it is Royalty Free > (look for 1588 in > http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/pat1390.html). However, > there is an open source version of it. > > Note that WebM is not IPR-free (read > http://www.webmproject.org/license/software/ "Copyright (c) 2010, > Google Inc »). > > So, on the two solutions that you propose: > > -There are UPnP royalty free implementation, made by UPnP Forum, an > open initiative counting 800 vendors. > > -There are Bonjour/mDNS royalty free implementation and IPR is the > property of one company. > > Regards, > > Olivier > > *From:*Jean-Claude Dufourd > [mailto:jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr] > *Sent:* mardi 7 juin 2011 11:04 > *To:* Olivier Carmona > *Cc:* public-web-and-tv@w3.org > *Subject:* Re: webtv-ISSUE-21: Time synchronisation > > Dear Olivier > > What is WebM, if not an attempt to redefine a video coding standard to > get rid of H.264 ? > There was a LONG discussion of just this subject on the HTML5 list. > > I am reacting to Russell's messages objecting to defining any feature > already existing in UPnP. > > May I remind you of the environment we are in ? We are operating in > W3C with IPR-free constraints, so we are not allowed to mandate the > use of an IPR-bearing standard such as UPnP. Not all alternatives to > UPnP have the precise sync feature. For the sake of argument, let us > say Bonjour/mDNS is relevant and does not have precise sync. The > precise sync feature is an important feature for our constituency. > > So we have to find a way to: > - allow the use of the UPnP precise sync feature. > - allow the use of Bonjour/mDNS together with PTP to achieve precise sync. > > Best regards > JC > > On 7/6/11 10:33 , Olivier Carmona wrote: > > JC, > > Reversely, an argument such as "let's implement it again" because it > does not follow W3C patent policy is not a better way to proceed. Up > to my knowledge, there are plenty of technology out on the market that > does not follow the W3C Patent Policy such as H.264, AAC, MPEG 4 > Visual, etc... for instance and that are referenced by HTML5 (see > http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec-author-view/video.html). > > Don't you think that there is a middle way in between here? > > Regards, > > Olivier > > *From:*Jean-Claude Dufourd > [mailto:jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr] > *Sent:* mardi 7 juin 2011 10:19 > *To:* public-web-and-tv@w3.org <mailto:public-web-and-tv@w3.org> > *Subject:* Re: webtv-ISSUE-21: Time synchronisation > > Thanks to Russell and Olivier for pointing out the precise technology > that allows this type of synchronisation. > > However, is this feature present in all discovery and service > protocols that HNTF has to consider ? I do not think so. > So it may be a valid request to have this feature in HNTF, to provide > it when the underlying technologies don't. > > An argument such as "this feature is already in this standard so do > not touch it" is difficult to accept, specially if the standard in > question does not follow the W3C patent policy. > > Best regards > JC > > > On 7/6/11 08:05 , Olivier Carmona wrote: > > JC, > > As an example, AwoX achieves below +/-10ms using PTP (aka IEEE > 1588-2002) within its commercial synchronized solutions above UPnP AV. > > Regards, > > Olivier > > *From:*Russell Berkoff [mailto:r.berkoff@sisa.samsung.com] > *Sent:* mardi 7 juin 2011 03:10 > *To:* Jean-Claude Dufourd; public-web-and-tv@w3.org > <mailto:public-web-and-tv@w3.org> > *Subject:* RE: webtv-ISSUE-21: Time synchronisation > > Hello, > > I'm told that IEEE-802.1AS is quite good at getting devices to > synchronize to a common timebase (down to the 10's of nS). > > UPnP actions to do scheduled playback such as SyncPlay() (based on > the availability of well synchronized device timebases) were added in > AV-4. This approach is different than the previous approach of having > a UPnP Control Point just send a Play command to the renderer at the > "right" moment. > > Sorry I couldn't provide the pointers to the specs earlier. > > Regards, > > Russell Berkoff > > *From:*public-web-and-tv-request@w3.org > <mailto:public-web-and-tv-request@w3.org> > [mailto:public-web-and-tv-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Jean-Claude > Dufourd > *Sent:* Monday, June 06, 2011 10:32 AM > *To:* public-web-and-tv@w3.org <mailto:public-web-and-tv@w3.org> > *Subject:* Re: webtv-ISSUE-21: Time synchronisation > > I would think the actual relevant section in the second document to be > 2.5.9 Clocksync (within the theory of operations you point to in > another email). > All examples point to a synchronisation in seconds. I can believe that > this technology allows a synchronization with a precision of seconds. > We believe there is no way to achieve lip-sync (-20ms to +40ms) with > such a mechanism based on UPnP 1.0, regardless of the media transport > technology used. > Best regards > JC > > On 6/6/11 10:47 , Russell Berkoff wrote: > > Hello, > > The submitted test case is redundant with facilities available in UPnP. > > UPnP AV-4 provides Linked Content Metadata (Object Linking) as well as > Precision Time Synchronization facilities. As previously mentioned in > this forum, the current UPnP specifications are now available at no > charge. > > Please refer to: > > http://www.upnp.org/specs/av/UPnP-av-ContentDirectory-v4-Service.pdf > > *Appendix G: Content Authoring with Object Linking* > > and > > http://www.upnp.org/specs/av/UPnP-av-AVTransport-v3-Service.pdf > > *2.4.25 SyncPlay()* > > Regards, > > Russell Berkoff > > > > > > -- > JC Dufourd > Directeur d'Etudes/Professor > Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group > Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing > Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France > Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144 > > > > __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la > base des signatures de virus 6185 (20110606) __________ > > Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la > base des signatures de virus 6185 (20110606) __________ > > Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > -- > JC Dufourd > Directeur d'Etudes/Professor > Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group > Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing > Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France > Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144 > > > > __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la > base des signatures de virus 6185 (20110606) __________ > > Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la > base des signatures de virus 6185 (20110606) __________ > > Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > -- > JC Dufourd > Directeur d'Etudes/Professor > Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group > Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing > Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France > Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144 > > > > __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la > base des signatures de virus 6185 (20110606) __________ > > Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > __________ Information provenant d'ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version de la > base des signatures de virus 6186 (20110607) __________ > > Le message a été vérifié par ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com -- JC Dufourd Directeur d'Etudes/Professor Groupe Multimedia/Multimedia Group Traitement du Signal et Images/Signal and Image Processing Telecom ParisTech, 37-39 rue Dareau, 75014 Paris, France Tel: +33145817733 - Mob: +33677843843 - Fax: +33145817144
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 11:31:53 UTC