[M4IF Discuss] What is the REAL advantage?

[Larry Horn]

Hello, Sanjav.
1)	Under last week's announcement, the license would have the disc
replicator pay for each packaged medium with MPEG-4 data.  
2)	For streaming content, a royalty would apply to the use of
MPEG-4 video in connection with which a service provider or content
owner receives remuneration as a result of offering/providing the video
for viewing or having the video viewed. 
Regards,
Larry Horn
MPEG LA
-----Original Message-----
From: Sanjay Kulkarni [mailto:kulkarniS   dvd.panasonic.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2024 1:45 PM
Cc: discuss   lists.m4if.org
Subject: Re: [M4IF Discuss] What is the REAL advantage?
I have a similar question.
If I were to bundle some MPEG4 content on my DVD (as ROM content), who
would pay
for the viewership? The player manufacturer for supplying the decoder,
me for
encoding  the content, or the disc replicator for replicating N discs
with MPEG4
content on it? What baffels me more is if part of my content is on the
disc and
some content is streamed from the Server. What kind of licensing would I
be
looking at in these cases?
...should I be thinking about copy-protection issues too?
Sanjay
Bill Bernat wrote:
> Internet streaming is only one part of a much bigger MPEG-4 picture,
and for
> much of that picture the recently proposed Visual licensing terms are
> perhaps excellent.
>
> For Internet streaming, I know this is just Visual (not audio and
systems)
> and it's understood that marketplace adoption will take time; however,
> assuming the big three were willing to pay the $1 cap on the decoder,
and in
> some cases perhaps on the encoder, to allow unlimited distribution,
would
> they be subject to the content use fee of $0.02 per hour played if the
> content were downloaded and not streamed?  For some content only?
Also,
> would they be willing to then include server support as well, and
include
> technology to enable webcasters to track and pony up the $0.02 for
each
> unicast hour?  Would a webcaster see enough benefit in MPEG-4 that
he/she
> would pay the $0.02 per hour.  What other questions do people have
about the
> licensing agreement?
>
> -billb
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adam Siegel [mailto:adrockus   earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2024 9:10 AM
> > To: discuss   lists.m4if.org
> > Subject: RE: [M4IF Discuss] What is the REAL advantage?
> >
> >
> > Makes sense that the "Big 3" would support MPEG-4 in their
> > players, at least to some extent. And once all 3 players
> > support it, won't that force all 3 servers to support it or
> > else be at a competitive disadvantage? But until this is the
> > case - I project maybe by Q2 '03 - I agree with Ben that
> > there really does not seem to be much of a point to investing
> > in creating MPEG-4 content for the Web.
> >
> > Even once MPEG-4 is supported by the leading players and
> > servers, it is still not clear to me that supporting
> > exclusively MPEG-4 will provide adequate cost savings or
> > other benefits over supporting a combination of 2-3 of the
> > Big 3, which is the current status quo - maybe sites with
> > really large amounts of content will save on storage costs,
> > but is this significant? Sure, it is nicer to not have to
> > make the user choose a format or try to detect the user's
> > installed players. But are these benefits enough to justify
> > the decision to move to a new format, buy new servers and
> > encoders, make the necessary changes to asset management and
> > publishing systems, etc? Not to mention these licensing
> > issues...Then there will probably also be inconsistencies in
> > the way the Big 3 support MPEG-4 so we will be limited to the
> > functionality supported by all. I really want to see MPEG-4
> > happen, but I am afraid it will take a few years for the
> > market to be ready and for MPEG-4 to have a broad impact on the Web.
> >
> > Adam Siegel
> > ex-cubed media minds
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: discuss-admin   lists.m4if.org
> > [mailto:discuss-admin   lists.m4if.org]On
> > Behalf Of Ben
> > Waggoner
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2024 7:46 PM
> > To: discuss   lists.m4if.org
> > Subject: Re: [M4IF Discuss] What is the REAL advantage?
> >
> > Rob,
> >
> >     Great point.  I'd expect that a ISMA Profile 1 file would
> > play unmodified in all three major players by the end of this year.
> >
> > Ben Waggoner
> > Interframe Media <http://www.interframemedia.com>
> > Digital Video Compression Consulting, Training, and Encoding
> >
> >
> >
> > on 2/5/02 1:53 PM, Rob Koenen at rkoenen   intertrust.com wrote:
> >
> > > Moreover, QuickTime has already showed MPEG-4 support
> > working at NAB
> > > last year, and Real has announced it too.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss   lists.m4if.org
http://lists.m4if.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss   lists.m4if.org
http://lists.m4if.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss   lists.m4if.org
> http://lists.m4if.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss   lists.m4if.org
http://lists.m4if.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss