[Linux-aus] Fwd: Ogg Vorbis and Theora removed from HTML5

[Mike Lampard]

On Sunday 16 December 2007 20:06:36 Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Michael Chesterton">
>
> > On 16/12/2007, at 1:47 PM, Janet Hawtin wrote:
> > > via LINK
> > >
> > > In move that can only be described as a FUD-driven attempt by Apple and
> > > other proprietary codec holders or supporters, the W3 has so far bowed
> > > to pressure to remove Ogg/Vorbis and Theora from the emerging HTML-5
> > > specification.
> >
> > Annoyingly I can't find a reference, but I read somewhere the text
> > removed was replaced with something that was stronger in support for
> > open, unencumbered formats.
>
> Mostly, despite the caveat about "additional patent risk", which is a real
> issue even if it seems convenient to ignore it. :-)
>
>   http://blog.kfish.org/2007/12/html5-for-free-media-today-on-whatwg.html
>
> - Jeff

Thanks for finding that.  So, while the Ogg family has been deemed 'iffy' by 
MS and co. the W3 are still wanting to find a codec "compatible with the 
open-source development model"... It's much less a step backward than some 
possible alternative wordings or having it cut altogether.  

..but..

I find the idea of 'additional patent risk' somewhat amusing, coming from the 
parties involved, even if valid.  I'm probably mistaken, but I believe Apple 
licence the Sorensen codec from a 3rd party, .mov is basically a container 
for mpeg[1-4], and I suspect that few if any modern MS codecs are developed 
in-house.  Possibly a silly question but IANAL -  I suppose they'd have 
protection from any possible patent infringement by those third-parties via 
the licence/royalty agreements?  

If so, how would Ogg be any different? Xiph have stated repeatedly that Ogg 
has no patent encumbrances, and the spec is in the public domain. Surely that 
would immunise any company using their tech?

Mike
Who is not an Ogg fanboi, but curious nevertheless.
And who is extremely apologetic about being so long-winded today and hijacking 
this list :)