[whatwg] several messages regarding Ogg in HTML5
silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com
Tue Dec 11 22:24:28 PST 2007
On Dec 12, 2007 11:38 AM, Dave Singer <singer at apple.com> wrote:
> Possible action:
> The members of the WG are engineers, not IPR experts. There is
> general consensus that a solution is desirable, but also that
> engineers are not well placed to find it:
> a) they are not experts in the IPR and licensing field;
> b) many of them are discouraged by their employers from reading
> patents or discussing IPR.
> It's clear that the December workshop cannot be silent on this
> subject. There must be recognition of the issue and evidence of at
> least efforts to solve it, and preferably signs of progress.
> It is probable that this is best handled in parallel with the
> technical work, and headed by someone 'technically neutral' and
> qualified, such as W3C technical and legal staff. A good start would
> be to:
> a) examine the declaration, licensing, and patent expiry situation
> for various codecs;
> b) contact the licensing authorities for various codecs to determine
> their level of interest and flexibility, and possibly invite them to
> the December workshop.
> c) analyze the open-source codecs for their risk level, and possibly
> seek statements from patent owners if that is deemed prudent;
What was the consensus on the "what to do" question? I would be quite
interested to get c) undertaken and see how real the submarine patent
threats are. Is that a real possibility for the W3C to do (I mean:
Also, if there is any potential that large patent owners could make
statements about the applicability of their patents to these open
specifications, the let's try it!
More information about the whatwg