I have some issues with the way that the section on IPR is written. While I agree with most of the statements there. I don't see my two biggest IPR concerns listed. 1) Specific to this document, we already have unencumbered CODECs that permit encoding of audio and video with acceptable fidelity and adequate compression for 95% of all purposes. Thus it is essential that the IPR regime for any future CODEC strictly limits the cost of using that technique to some portion of the cost savings from reduction in bandwidth use. 2) The principal concern I have with IPR licensing in general is not the cost of licensing but the difficulty of licensing. I have on several occasions been in negotiations with an IPR holder who is completely unable to decide how much money they want or on what terms they are willing to offer their IPR. 3) Linked to that is the problem of uncertainty. A purported rights holder can only grant a license for the rights they hold, they cannot and will not provide a warranty with respect to any other rights. While due to the lingering effects of submarine patents it is impossible to know if any CODEC is completely unencumbered, it is a very safe bet that the audio codecs used for cinema sound in the mid 1980s are now unencumbered. It is not possible to be confident that any new audio codec is unencumbered. Taken in combination, I cannot imagine any reason to use any audio codec other than MP3 or AC2 (or some other similar legacy scheme) once we can be assured that the corresponding patents have expired. I really could not care less what fidelity or other benefits might be claimed for them. Bandwidth and storage are much cheaper than the financial benefits offered by the technology held by the rights holders. The situation is very slightly different for video codecs, but not by a great deal. So the overall experience has been that it is like trying to negotiate the purchase of some fancy-schmancy kitchen cabinets from some guy who hasn't a clue about business but is desperate to make sure that they don't leave a penny on the table even if his dithering about is likely to cost him the business. Meanwhile you can get a perfectly serviceable set of cabinets from Home Depot and Lowes where they will give you price on the page ordering. In this case there is a free alternative in almost every application worth bothering about. On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:12 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The IESG has received a request from the Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG > (codec) to consider the following document: > - 'Guidelines for the Codec Development Within the IETF' > <draft-ietf-codec-guidelines-05.txt> as an Informational RFC > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2011-10-19. Exceptionally, comments may be > sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > Abstract > > > This document provides general guidelines for work on developing and > specifying a codec within the IETF. These guidelines cover the > development process, evaluation, requirements conformance, and > intellectual property issues. > > > > > The file can be obtained via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-codec-guidelines/ > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-codec-guidelines/ > > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. > > > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/ _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf