On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 02:50:52AM -0500, Monty Montgomery wrote: > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:38 AM, Hoene <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oops, > > > > it covers the SILK part of Opus and it valid for another three year :-( > > I think it is time to start working on Opus V2.0. > > It's hardly time to panic :-P We'll review it like the others that > have come in.
Did we ever hear back from Huawei about their uncertainty over their rushed last-minute declaration of the patent they bought? I thought they'd promised to follow up on that ... It is mildly amusing to see the people who objected to this group forming, who claimed there was no expertise here to produce a competitive codec, and who persist in objecting to its RF status, seem to have such amazing trouble not only understanding this codec, but also their _own_ patents and what they actually apply to ... I'd certainly be embarrassed to be consistently that wrong about everything. 'Oops' indeed. Ron _______________________________________________ codec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
