[M4IF Discuss] the packaged content fees

[Rob Koenen]

This is a good example for asking more questions.
1) is this use indeed subject to the use fee? 
2) what if, for each camera 
	- usually nobody watches even though the thing is always on
	- on average 3 people watch at any given moment?
Rob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ashok Yerneni [mailto:ashok   broadware.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2024 10:24
> To: Jordan Greenhall; discuss   lists.m4if.org; 'Larry Horn'
> Subject: RE: [M4IF Discuss] the packaged content fees
> 
> 
> 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!
> 
> I would rather pay higher upfront fee(maybe $10 to $20) for 
> the encoder
> and leave the decoder at 25c.
> 
> Another approach maybe application/industry-segment specific 
> licensing??
> 
> regards,
> 
> Ashok
> ===
> Ashok Yerneni                           Ph:  408 342 2630
> CTO & VP of Engineering,                Fax: 408 342 2601
> BroadWare Technologies, Inc             ashok   broadware.com
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-admin   lists.m4if.org
> [mailto:discuss-admin   lists.m4if.org]On Behalf Of Jordan Greenhall
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2024 10:08 AM
> To: discuss   lists.m4if.org; 'Larry Horn'
> Subject: RE: [M4IF Discuss] the packaged content fees
> 
> 
> O.K., Discuss-list, we've seen a pretty good bit of grousing about the
> licensing terms and no small amount of winceing as the details are
> coming clear.  It is pretty obvious that the strengths of MPEG-4
> (applicable to virtually any kind of multimedia, at any 
> bitrate, via any
> medium) are also its weaknesses when it comes to licensing.  A scheme
> that makes sense for a 2 hour movie on a $25 DVD is non-sense 
> for 50 ten
> second clips on a promo CD-rom and equivalently difficult to 
> square for
> 15Kbps wireless broadcasts.
> 
> As I see it right now, the key problems are:
> 
> 1. Lack of Synch between license fees and content monetization
> 2. Onerous and "novel" tracking requirements
> 3. Concern that burdening content with license fees will 
> "short circuit"
> adoption of the standard (i.e., what if we held a standard and nobody
> came?)
> 
> Now it also seems clear that the license terms are a work-in-progress
> and that MPEGLA is more than willing to review alternative or
> supplementary proposals.
> 
> My query to the group - what are the proposed alternatives?
> 
> J
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss   lists.m4if.org
> http://lists.m4if.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>