<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Future Collaboration between MPEG and VCEG</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.h265.net/2009/07/future-collaboration-between-mpeg-and-vceg.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.h265.net/2009/07/future-collaboration-between-mpeg-and-vceg.html</link>
	<description>Witness the development of H.265</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 02:35:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Grant</title>
		<link>http://www.h265.net/2009/07/future-collaboration-between-mpeg-and-vceg.html/comment-page-1#comment-2337</link>
		<dc:creator>John Grant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.h265.net/?p=112#comment-2337</guid>
		<description>Nevertheless, it is possible to implement efficient video coding using only royalty-free technology -- see http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/dirac/licensing.shtml</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nevertheless, it is possible to implement efficient video coding using only royalty-free technology &#8212; see <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/dirac/licensing.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/dirac/licensing.shtml</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jie Dong</title>
		<link>http://www.h265.net/2009/07/future-collaboration-between-mpeg-and-vceg.html/comment-page-1#comment-2299</link>
		<dc:creator>Jie Dong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 03:23:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.h265.net/?p=112#comment-2299</guid>
		<description>Video coding standards adopt a much larger number of patented innovations than JPEG. I think it is reasonable to license these innovations at a cost to reward the contributors. Of course, the IP cost should be affordable. 

IPR policy of the standard bodies greatly influences the IP cost of the developed standards. ITU-T and ISO/IEC&#039;s IPR policy is so unassertive that the development of necessary patent licensing programs falls to the industry, such as MPEG LA. ITU-T and ISO/IEC also take the risk that the standard may be rejected by the market because of the harsh licensing terms developed by MPEG LA. 

It is worth introducing the IPR policy of AVS, the audio and video coding standard of China. AVS IPR policy is designed to consider the licensing in parallel with the technical work, when deciding which contributions to adopt into the standard, the standard committee does not consider only efficiency and complexity, but also considers the IPR implications. To avoid high IP cost, some compromises are required, but the benefits of a non-proprietary open standard and the licensing cost savings easily outweigh the small loss in performance. The IP cost for each AVS equippment is only one CNY.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Video coding standards adopt a much larger number of patented innovations than JPEG. I think it is reasonable to license these innovations at a cost to reward the contributors. Of course, the IP cost should be affordable. </p>
<p>IPR policy of the standard bodies greatly influences the IP cost of the developed standards. ITU-T and ISO/IEC&#8217;s IPR policy is so unassertive that the development of necessary patent licensing programs falls to the industry, such as MPEG LA. ITU-T and ISO/IEC also take the risk that the standard may be rejected by the market because of the harsh licensing terms developed by MPEG LA. </p>
<p>It is worth introducing the IPR policy of AVS, the audio and video coding standard of China. AVS IPR policy is designed to consider the licensing in parallel with the technical work, when deciding which contributions to adopt into the standard, the standard committee does not consider only efficiency and complexity, but also considers the IPR implications. To avoid high IP cost, some compromises are required, but the benefits of a non-proprietary open standard and the licensing cost savings easily outweigh the small loss in performance. The IP cost for each AVS equippment is only one CNY.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Kerpan</title>
		<link>http://www.h265.net/2009/07/future-collaboration-between-mpeg-and-vceg.html/comment-page-1#comment-2295</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Kerpan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:19:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.h265.net/?p=112#comment-2295</guid>
		<description>I hope that you folks take a cue from the JPEG folks and try to do a standard that can be legally implemented by free software developers in the sad parts of the world that believe in malarkey such as software patents. I know that MPEG LA is a big money maker, but its time to turn them into an adovacte for royalty free stuff rather than a money machine for big companies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope that you folks take a cue from the JPEG folks and try to do a standard that can be legally implemented by free software developers in the sad parts of the world that believe in malarkey such as software patents. I know that MPEG LA is a big money maker, but its time to turn them into an adovacte for royalty free stuff rather than a money machine for big companies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
