- From: Olivier Carmona <ocarmona@awox.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:47:52 +0200
- To: Jean-Claude Dufourd <jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr>
- CC: "public-web-and-tv@w3.org" <public-web-and-tv@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <B670FA1DB6CA6E4A945001BA08E200CE4D5C47A0EE@TENERIFE.awox.com>
Dear JC, 1/ I would be glad if you could bring us the proof that UPnP is a royalty bearing standard. 2/ Having an open source implementation does not prevent you to pay royalty for the intellectual property coded below. Best regards, Olivier From: Jean-Claude Dufourd [mailto:jean-claude.dufourd@telecom-paristech.fr] Sent: mardi 7 juin 2011 13:31 To: Olivier Carmona Cc: public-web-and-tv@w3.org Subject: Re: webtv-ISSUE-21: Time synchronisation 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<mailto: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 __________ 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
Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2011 11:48:30 UTC