Andy:
Although this preference cannot guarantee that the working
group will produce an unencumbered codec, the working group shall
attempt to adhere to the spirit of BCP 79. This preference does not
explicitly rule out the possibility of adapting encumbered technologies;
such decisions will be made in accordance with the rough consensus of
the working group.
>
I appreciate the potential difficulty of guaranteeing the unencumbered
status of any output of this group. However, I would like this statement to
be stronger, saying that this group will only produce a new codec if it is
strongly believed by WG rough consensus to either be unencumbered,
or freely licensed by the IPR holder(s), if any.
I do not think that anyone wants the outcome to be yet another
encumbered codec. I think these words are trying to say what you want,
but they are also trying to be realistic.
Does the following text strike a better balance?
Although this preference cannot guarantee that the working
group will produce an unencumbered codec, the working group shall
follow BCP 79, and adhere to the spirit of BCP 79. The working
group cannot explicitly rule out the possibility of adapting
encumbered technologies; however, the working group will try to
avoid encumbered technologies that require royalties.
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf