[M4IF Discuss] RE: [OpenDTV] News: Terms of MPEG-4 Visual Pat ent Portfolio License Announced

[Rob Koenen]

I have some of the same concerns, Jordan.
However, my hope for this scenario is the fact that broadcast
(which I take to include all one-to-many scenarios, so including
webcast), is still under study. Apparently, we are not the only 
ones that did the math in this way. If what goes below should 
be  taken literally, it is highly doubtful that MPEG-4 can 
compete.
Rob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jordan Greenhall [mailto:jgreenhall   divxnetworks.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2024 18:50
> To: 'Rob Koenen'; craig   pcube.com; jmcclenny   sandstream.com; OpenDTV
> Mail List; M4IF Discussion List (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [M4IF Discuss] RE: [OpenDTV] News: Terms of MPEG-4 Visual
> Patent Portfolio License Announced
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> As I read it, the use fee is based on actual hours watched, not hours
> broadcasted.  Thus, the formula below would be modified:
> 
> [Hours Watched / Subscriber / Month] X [total subscribers] * [$0.02] =
> usage fees.  Then something like Nielsons would be used as a surrogate
> to determine hours watched by a subscriber.  
> 
> This is a (very little) bit more reasonable, as a stream of seinfeld
> would cost more than a stream of a brady bunch rerun.  But, even then,
> it is commercially unreasonable.  Take a look:
> 
> 1. DVD with 120 minute movie.  Revenue: $25.  MPEG-4 license 
> fee: $0.04.
> Fee as % of Revenue: .16%
> 2. A broadcast of that exact same movie with commercials.  Revenue: $1
> (48 30 second commercials at a $25 CPM).  MPEG-4 license fee.  $0.04.
> Fee as % of Revenue: 4%
> 
> The cost of the MPEG-4 license scales with views, not revenue 
> generated
> by views.  This is like the bandwidth problem that has killed 
> streaming
> media on the Internet.  
> 
> There are other odd effects as well.
> 
> J
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Koenen [mailto:rkoenen   intertrust.com] 
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2024 12:52 PM
> To: 'craig   pcube.com'; jmcclenny   sandstream.com; OpenDTV Mail 
> List; M4IF
> Discussion List (E-mail)
> Subject: [M4IF Discuss] RE: [OpenDTV] News: Terms of MPEG-4 Visual
> Patent Portfolio License Announced
> 
> 
> > The fee would be prohibitively expensive  IF calculated based on: 
> > [Channels]  X  [programming hours]  X  [total subscribers]  X 
> > [$0.02/hr] = usage fees
> 
> While not passing any judgement on the announced scheme at 
> this moment,
> the press release makes it somewhat clear that this is not the way
> things will be calculated. 
> 
> "[... a surrogate (e.g., standard industry audience measurement) is 
>   under consideration."
> 
> http://www.mpegla.com/news_release31Jan2002.html
> 
> But this is far from conclusive; what exactly the calculation *will*
> look like is unclear - and MPEG-4's future depends on it.
> 
> It should also be noted that (AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT) you pay
> *either* 
> the encoder/decoder fee *or* the use fee, not both. You pay a use fee
> for use of MPEG-4 "[...] 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 (including without 
> limitation 
>   pay-per-view, subscription and advertiser/underwriter-supported
> services)." To me that seems to include all free-to-air 
> broadcasts ... 
> You pay encoder/decoder fees for other services.
> 
> All this seems to imply a one-to-one link between the decoder and the 
> service, which is not going to exist in this context of an open 
> standard where any player can play any content -- so I wonder 
> how this 
> is going to be detailed.
> 
> Rob
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss   lists.m4if.org http://lists.m4if.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>