[M4IF Discuss] Article in Salon.com

[Rob Koenen]

A combination of keys that was so far unknown to me
made the email leave too soon.
>  -----Original Message-----
Hi Damien,
I just read your article on MPEG-4 licenses - very interesting.
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2002/03/06/mpeg/index.html
A few facts in the very opening do, however, create potential
misunderstanding that will significantly confuse the issue:
"On Jan. 31, the agency charged with licensing MPEG-4, a standard for
digital 
  audio and video compression, announced a series of new fees."
   MPEGLA is _not_ charged with licensing by anyone, except by
   the licensors themselves that seek to operate through a single
   outlet. Their license is always non-exclusive
"More controversially, the alliance of companies pushing the MPEG-4 standard
also proposed a "use fee" 
  the real alliance of companies pusing MPEG-4 is not MPEGLA but M4IF, 
  which has _not_ proposed the use fee. 
"Cooked up by an alliance of 18 consumer electronics companies called
MPEG-LA, 
the MPEG-4 standard is"
    MPEG-4 was _not_ cooked up by MPEGLA or the licensors,
    but by MPEG, an ISO standards grouip (the Moving Picture 
    Experts Group) Many more than the 18 licensors took part. 
    see http://mpeg.telecomitalialab.com
"a 2 cents an hour charge that either users or manufacturers 
 of the software would have to come up with. "
  User will _not_ be charged under the proposed scheme.
Thanks for the (rest of) the article which is interesting and 
highlights the different perspectives well.
Best Regards,
Rob Koenen