[M4IF Discuss] the packaged content fees

[Yuval Fisher]

> If I can add to this discussion, I think the "USE fee" is a Major
> ditterant to widespread adoption. We are a remote business management,
> distance learning company and we were hoping to use MPEG-4 low-bitrate
> streaming mode for streaming security camera feeds to all types of
> displays(cell-phones, PDA's, or even PC's with just a modem connection).
> Camera's typically are always on 24/7 and if we do the math, we have to
> pay $15/camera in royalties every month! That's just not cost-effective
> when you consider this over hundreds/thousands of cameras!

Yoiks! An excellent example of an emerging market that's completely
choked by the terms as they are.. unless the terms for broadcast/cable,
which were not part of the outline, will apply in your case as well. 
Since cable service providers can't afford $15/channel/month, I think
it's clear that some other arrangement will have to be worked out for
24/7 operations with multiple channels. 
I also agree (with the implication) that the symmetry between the
encoders and decoders only makes sense for one scenario: the
teleconferencing market. 
What are the problems with (doing away with the streaming fees and)
having encoder fees based on some kind of classification :
1) Live Encoder with < 10 viewers (basically teleconferencing)
	should be cheap to promote usage
2) Live Encoder with > 10 viewers:
	should scale with viewship
3) File encoders for personal use
	should be free to promote MPEG-4 usage. Ubiquity of decoders
	would help the license holders by promoting use of MPEG-4 in uses
	with license fees.
4) File encoders for re-distribution
	charge by duration. 
Well.. it's just a thought; I'm no lawyer. 
Best, Yuval