[foms] MPEG TS streams and patents

이현재 hj08.lee at lge.com
Mon Dec 13 16:58:39 PST 2010

I have same concern with Jereon.
As we all know, MPEG has been very hostile mud, struggling to get whatever
tiny IPR even though unnecessary. Paradoxically speaking, due to the tragic
success of MPEG2 adoption of broadcast system, it's natural gene is
DASH discussion is very unconstructive as far as I can tell from attending
the meeting so far.

I generally agree with Mark in that it may be royalty free because we have
a few powerful free alternatives, but still I have lingering concern
because CE industry has bad experience of MPEG based mp3 and jpeg royalty
claim that were regarded royalty free when other alternatives coexisted.
Basically CE industry has a dormant phobia to MPEG. It does not guarantee
royalty free in written document.
However, MPEG is weakening now, besides MPEG2, MPEG4 is going to royalty
free because of powerful free alternatives.

I would like to mention that the progress of DASH is unsuccessful so far
because of its bad gene. Somebody just say many people and many
contributions are the metric of successful discussion which I think not. If
we start the discussion at different place, it will enjoy good progress
based on good will.

Best regards,

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:38:55 -0800
From: Mark Watson <watsonm at netflix.com>
Subject: Re: [foms] MPEG TS streams and patents
To: Foundations of Open Media Software <foms at lists.annodex.net>
Message-ID: <7781D34C-C357-4FFB-B9AD-DF5BDCD96345 at netflix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


I would not recommend using Transport Streams - and not just because of the
possible IPR.

MPEG DASH supports both MPEG2 TS and MP4 file formats. It doesn't mandate
either and you could easily specify how the DASH manifest could be used
with a different file format such as WebM, provided the file format has the
necessary features. There is also nothing mandated in DASH which is
specific to a particular media codec, though obviously MPEG tries hardest
to provide support for MPEG codecs.

In any adaptive streaming standard, manifest format, media file format and
media codecs should be decoupled as far as possible.

Most important for adaptive streaming is agreement on the file format and
general data model. Specific manifest format is secondary, because if you
have an agreed data model it can easily be mapped into your favorite format.

IMO, a good way for someone to completely kill MPEG DASH would be to
attempt to charge royalties - there are "free" alternatives. Everyone I
have spoken to on the committee understands this and I have not heard any
talk about folding DASH into any patent pools (existing or new).

I can't say for certain that noone will, but it makes no sense for people
to invest in developing a standard and then to take action which they know
will kill it. I think it very likely it will end up with the same status as
ISO Base Media File format, which is widely used without IPR issues.

Obviously, though, you have to make your own judgements: "Mark thinks it is
very likely..." means exactly what it says.


On Dec 13, 2010, at 5:21 AM, Jeroen Wijering wrote:

> Hello all,
> Just to be sure, a transport stream is also a patent encumbered format,
correct? So packing up VP8 / Vorbis into TS fragments for adaptive
streaming would not be an open solution? It looks like transport streams
are part of either the MPEG2 or MPEG2 Systems pool from MPEG-LA. See the
PTS/DTS/PAT/PMT references: 
> http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/m2/Documents/m2CrossRefChart.pdf
> http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/m2s/Documents/m2sCrossRefChart.pdf 
> Thinking forward, would this mean MPEG DASH is also a no-go as an
adaptive streaming standard? It seems to rely heavily on TS / MP4 / AVC. In
turn, DASH might also be folded into one of the MPEG LA pools. Does anybody
know more about this?
> Kind regards,
> Jeroen
> _______________________________________________
> foms mailing list
> foms at lists.annodex.net
> http://lists.annodex.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foms


foms mailing list
foms at lists.annodex.net

More information about the foms mailing list