At 21:04 -0500 13/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know it's fashionable to slam Apple right now for being "the new
Evil", but I don't want to play that game. Even if Apple's real
motivation is entirely selfish (promote Quicktime over Ogg) can you
blame them? That would be, by far, the easiest course of action to
explain to shareholders.
I also don't think Apple knows anything specific. I think they have
some legitimate fear of the unknown and this isn't just
obstructionism. That's my take, and it's pure speculation. I'd like
very much to work with Apple and address their concerns.
Thank you. We have not yet actually promoted or suggested anything,
as we are as yet unsure of what would meet all the needs, address
risks, etc.
Also, I should note that we are not the only company expressing
caution. We are not trying to be obstructive but rather the
reverse. We want a solution which is effective and we are willing to
work to that end, but some things are probably better done at arm's
length or by a neutral party.
<p>2) Adobe is indemnifying Apple against a patent lawsuit over the Flash
plugin</p>
Honestly can't comment. I'd love to know if that was the case too.
Is there anything truthful / false in this comment?
Apple has made the same patent uncertainty statements in the past
regarding both Vorbis and FLAC. I see no evidence (as yet) that
Apple's objection is anything specific to Tremor. I think they see
merely that MPEG, of which they are a part, has laid a huge patent
minefield designed to discourage competition and it's hard to believe
anyone has navigated through it.
To be fair, if anything, it's patent owners, not MPEG. MPEG merely
takes steps to try to ensure that IPR it is aware of and is needed
for their specs is RAND licensable. Anything else is out of scope.
We contribute to the standards, and we implement and license (some
of) them. AFAIK we are not members of the pools for either video or
audio.
--
David Singer
Apple/QuickTime
