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

[whatwg] The truth about Nokias claims

From: Krzysztof Żelechowski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 12:42:10 +0100
Message-ID: <1197718930.7533.46.camel@a1dmin.vola.spe.com.pl>

Dnia 15-12-2007, So o godzinie 21:14 +1100, Shannon pisze:
> > They are not easy ways forward, I agree.
> > How would _you_ recommend addressing Apple's requirements while still 
> > addressing the requirements of the rest of the community?
> >
> >   
> I would recommend that Apple and Nokia follow the example set by 
> Goomplayer (and others) by allowing users to download codecs on-demand 
> from third-party providers (like Sourceforge). 

If I were Apple, I would not want my product to be contaminated by rogue
code and zombified.  In case that happens, I would be held guilty, not
the contaminator.

> This puts the risk 
> squarely in the users court and better yet allows Safari/Quicktime to 
> adapt to new codecs in the future. It may be my foggy memory but last I 
> checked Quicktime could already do this. If such a time comes that the 
> patent risk is resolved they could bundle it then. However, most media 
> players are bloated enough without bundling every codec so it's really a 
> win for everybody.
> If this still wasn't enough then they could join a patent pact with 
> other large vendors to provide a mutual defense / shared liability fund. 
> If Ogg was under threat they'd probably get the FFII to help them fight 
> it pro-bono.

Please observe that nobody asked you what you think Apple should do.

Received on Saturday, 15 December 2007 03:42:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:59 UTC