1) Industry Adoption
--------------------
Jan, Holger, Eric, Andrea, MikeD?, Ryan, MikeS?, Julien, Bill, Shane
Codec naming and branding issue
Eric: names like Ogg, Vorbis don't really give any idea of what the technology
is. Naming could be important to foster mainstream adoption.
Mike: But .. h.264, mp3, etc. They're not exactly named well.
[Discussion about whether end users know what these names mean]
Bill: in my opinion the name doesn't matter, but the long term stability of the
name does.
Jan: people get confused because Ogg used to mean Audio, but now it means Video
Same kind of confusion as with AVI (container vs. content).
Bill, Eric, Ryn:
problems are:
- lack of exposure
- changing meaning of names
- need for clear and simple definitions
...but these are problems for commercial codecs as well.
Using anti-DRM bandwagon to push open media formats
Ryan: people are going to be hurt by DRM so we can push alternatives
Bill: would have thought open DVD standard would have helped here.
Ryan: are DVDs? even relevant?
me: people are OK with DVD content protection. More online content that we
should concentrate on.
Ryan: freedoms are being taken away, so providing alternatives and education
should be sufficient
Eric: alternative ways to do file sharing?
Shane: don't want to be the people that help illegal file sharing. Want to get
in with CC.
Eric: what about an alternative to DRM that focuses on CC rights protection
MikeS?: still a technological protection method
MikeD?: CC work can help with this (machine readable, lawyer readable, human
readable parts to license)
Andrea: is DRM presence or absence really a problem for industry adoption? I
don't really think it is. Should concentrate on how we can push the content.
Why would industry use open media? Don't need to pay to produce isn't a big
issue.
Ryan: Need to create a service that uses open content. This will also open up
more features for users (e.g. remixing, etc.)
Holger: need to work on issues like 4 hours encoding for 1 hour of content then
MikeD?: not a problem with core duo (4 streams in realtime!)
What needs to happen to get wikipedia to use theora?
MikeD?: SoC? project to get media playback integrated with mediawiki, but not
pushed back into project.
Problems:
- cortado instability
- bandwidth considerations
Jan: potential issue with review burden
MikeS?: Community - issue is production tools. The only reasonable way at the
moment is for them to use their native tools and us to transcode at the end.
Bill: is there a need for specific evangalism?
MikeS?: yes, there is a need for it.
Ryan: should we be talking about what the issues are here? or are we all
painfully aware of it?
Bill: also the value add after transcoding - extra stuff that can be done once
transcoded content is available
Holger: a good strategy is to relate to the Word format
Promoting within industry - they're going to want DRM
Ryan: DRM isn't working, people are seeing that
Jan: industry doesn't agree with that. Even if only stops 10%, might as well
put that on.
Ryan: maybe convenience is a good way around DRM - e.g. I don't store video
any more now that YouTube? is around.
Jan: in this case though, convenience means "free".
Jean-Marc: People are using DRM for control.
Andrea: content like news, current affairs can be released free.
Julien: if you want to get big content providers to use it is to show that
there's a reasonable chance of there being players on consumer's machines, AND
that they can save bits per stream
Holger: wikipedia is a better target anyway
Bill: and once something like that takes off then industry will follow
Jean-Marc: we should just be looking at the easy targets and getting them to
help convince the harder targets
[ discussion about public broadcasters and open formats ]
innovative applications
Holger: we need funding
developers:
Bill: Canon will fund stuff if we can find a good reason, the problem is
finding a good reason.
Summary:
- code naming and branding - need to improve exposure, make sure naming is consistent, provide clear and simple definitions
- DRM - don't want to go there, can't see a simple way to convince big industry without it. Let's worry about that later and just get people using the stuff for now. It's an issue that needs to be addressed later.
- adoption - need to target consumers, industry will follow. Should concentrate on easy targets first (wikipedia, creative commons), then online news after that.
- Comparison to word documents is a great way to encourage use of open formats
Goals:
- Summary page (in wikipedia) for meaning of open codecs
- Get embedded media into wikipedia - Michael Dale is going to work on this and
- keep people informed (changes to mediawiki + communication with wikipedia guys)
- Get annodex on wikipedia (long term)
- Talk to creative commons about offering free formats (Shane will chat to people about this).