- From: Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>
- Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 14:33:55 -0700
- To: Steve Lhomme <slhomme@matroska.org>
- 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>
Sent from my iPhone On Mar 19, 2011, at 11:44 AM, "Steve Lhomme" <slhomme@matroska.org> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote: >> The technology actually in the DASH specification for manifest formats isn't yet subject to any patent disclosures that I have am aware of and I would expect to be aware of them. I qualify my statements only because I am not a lawyer and this is all legally sensitive stuff. > > Do you mean that so far no one has asked, among the MPEG participants, > for patent disclosure ? If not when is it planned to happen ? After > the specifications are finalized ? MPEG has asked, but I wouldn't expect companies to make disclosures until the text is finalized in July. This is why it is premature to assume there are some great number if encumbrances with companies rabid for royalties on this thing. Furthermore, what we should care about is whether the spec can be used by W3C under *W3C* policy, not what status it has under MPEG's policy. That's what I proposed to ask. It a simple yes/no question. It doesn't make presumptions or close future options and I think there is value in asking it. ...Mark > > -- > Steve Lhomme > Matroska association Chairman >
Received on Saturday, 19 March 2011 21:35:06 UTC