G.729 licensing project

All:

Because G.729 is so important to my world, I've contacted
each of Intel 
and Sipro.  For the benefit of others that may need
licensing here are 
the costs and contacts:

Intel:
http://www.intel.com/c
d/software/products/asmo-na/eng/download/locations/index.htm
#perflib
$199 one time and $80 a year.

Sipro:  http://sipro.com
Sipro is handling the G.729/G.723 patents for all those that
claim have 
claimed ownership: France Telecom, Mitsubishi, Electric
Corporation, 
Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Corporation,Universite de
Sherbrooke (The 
G.729 Consortium), NEC and Nokia.
Typically Sipro charges an annual fee per port of use.  The
killer here 
is the minimum - 1000 ports.  Your entry fee is: US $9,884.

I'm pretty certain that I'm going to have to step up to
these costs.  To 
that end, I am thinking of building a library of the
Intel/Sipro work 
for use with OpenPBX and distributing the libraries for
commercial use, 
as permitted by the Intel/Sipro licensing, at a fee similar
to the 
structure defined by Digium. 

Is there any interest here or am I the only one with
commercial use plans?
_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev

Jac Barben wrote:
> All:
>
> Because G.729 is so important to my world, I've
contacted each of Intel 
> and Sipro.  For the benefit of others that may need
licensing here are 
> the costs and contacts:
>
> Intel:
> http://www.intel.com/c
d/software/products/asmo-na/eng/download/locations/index.htm
#perflib
> $199 one time and $80 a year.
>   
This part is trivial. 
> Sipro:  http://sipro.com
> Sipro is handling the G.729/G.723 patents for all those
that claim have 
> claimed ownership: France Telecom, Mitsubishi, Electric
Corporation, 
> Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Corporation,Universite
de Sherbrooke (The 
> G.729 Consortium), NEC and Nokia.
> Typically Sipro charges an annual fee per port of use. 
The killer here 
> is the minimum - 1000 ports.  Your entry fee is: US
$9,884.
>   
Its worse than that. NEC and Nokia are not actually
represented by 
Sipro, and you must pay them separately. All Sipro do is
tell you who 
you need to contact. NEC and Nokia want about as much as
Sipro, so you 
can more or less double the prices Sipro quote. Unless
something has 
changed recently, the price you quote is an illusion brought
on by the 
confusing way they present things. I seem to remember it
works out 
somewhat higher, and then you double it for the NEC and
Nokia part.
> I'm pretty certain that I'm going to have to step up to
these costs.  To 
> that end, I am thinking of building a library of the
Intel/Sipro work 
> for use with OpenPBX and distributing the libraries for
commercial use, 
> as permitted by the Intel/Sipro licensing, at a fee
similar to the 
> structure defined by Digium. 
>
> Is there any interest here or am I the only one with
commercial use plans?
>   
We know this needs sorting out. A telephony platform without
G.729 just 
won't fly at this time. The Freeswitch people have the same
issue, and 
we hope we can work with them to a mutual solution. There is
a company, 
whose web site name I forgot, which is providing G.729 for
small users 
like us. There web site makes it look like they are dead,
but the 
Freeswitch guys have been in touch with them, and it seems
they are 
still active.

Since we have plenty to do right now, I've just been waiting
to see what 
Freeswitch dredges up as a workable solution. We intend to
support these 
things through pipes, with the transcoder running as a
separate process. 
That completely avoids licencing issues with our pure GPL
core, and the 
overhead is no big deal when you compare it against the
compute cost of 
the codec.

Regards,
Steve

_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev

I've actually spoke with Steve as well as people from FS on
this.

http://qodec.com/ is the
site he is referring to. Not sure how much of
a bounty FS is looking for to get this off the ground or
pricing
afterward though.

Also some DSP based boards that can do G729 that are trying
to target
this niche as well.

But yes I'm looking into this as well but haven't had much
time to
follow up on it.

-- William
_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev

My attorneys checked this out pretty carefully.  Sipro
represented, in 
writing, that they are the only proxy for all known owners
of g.729 
annex a and annex b.  None-the-less, I'll forward your
concerns back to 
my attorneys  for a double-double  on this.

I'm actually expecting a written "legal opinion"
on the matter this week.

J



Steve Underwood wrote:
> Jac Barben wrote:
>   
>> All:
>>
>> Because G.729 is so important to my world, I've
contacted each of Intel 
>> and Sipro.  For the benefit of others that may need
licensing here are 
>> the costs and contacts:
>>
>> Intel:
>> http://www.intel.com/c
d/software/products/asmo-na/eng/download/locations/index.htm
#perflib
>> $199 one time and $80 a year.
>>   
>>     
> This part is trivial. 
>   
>> Sipro:  http://sipro.com
>> Sipro is handling the G.729/G.723 patents for all
those that claim have 
>> claimed ownership: France Telecom, Mitsubishi,
Electric Corporation, 
>> Nippon Telephone and Telegraph
Corporation,Universite de Sherbrooke (The 
>> G.729 Consortium), NEC and Nokia.
>> Typically Sipro charges an annual fee per port of
use.  The killer here 
>> is the minimum - 1000 ports.  Your entry fee is: US
$9,884.
>>   
>>     
> Its worse than that. NEC and Nokia are not actually
represented by 
> Sipro, and you must pay them separately. All Sipro do
is tell you who 
> you need to contact. NEC and Nokia want about as much
as Sipro, so you 
> can more or less double the prices Sipro quote. Unless
something has 
> changed recently, the price you quote is an illusion
brought on by the 
> confusing way they present things. I seem to remember
it works out 
> somewhat higher, and then you double it for the NEC and
Nokia part.
>   
>> I'm pretty certain that I'm going to have to step
up to these costs.  To 
>> that end, I am thinking of building a library of
the Intel/Sipro work 
>> for use with OpenPBX and distributing the libraries
for commercial use, 
>> as permitted by the Intel/Sipro licensing, at a fee
similar to the 
>> structure defined by Digium. 
>>
>> Is there any interest here or am I the only one
with commercial use plans?
>>   
>>     
> We know this needs sorting out. A telephony platform
without G.729 just 
> won't fly at this time. The Freeswitch people have the
same issue, and 
> we hope we can work with them to a mutual solution.
There is a company, 
> whose web site name I forgot, which is providing G.729
for small users 
> like us. There web site makes it look like they are
dead, but the 
> Freeswitch guys have been in touch with them, and it
seems they are 
> still active.
>
> Since we have plenty to do right now, I've just been
waiting to see what 
> Freeswitch dredges up as a workable solution. We intend
to support these 
> things through pipes, with the transcoder running as a
separate process. 
> That completely avoids licencing issues with our pure
GPL core, and the 
> overhead is no big deal when you compare it against the
compute cost of 
> the codec.
>
> Regards,
> Steve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openpbx-dev mailing list
> Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
> http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev
>
>   
_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev

Update on G.729 licensing.

1.  The Sipro licensing price:  The price is a one-time US
$9,884 for 
1000 ports.  Once this is paid the "licensee" is
granted 1000 ports to 
play with and distribute.  However, the licensee must
publish back to 
Sipro annually how many ports are actually in-use/have been

distributed.  In the event the licensee is using more than
the 1000 
ports Sipro will charge accordingly per port over the 1000.
2.  The Sipro license covers only the essential patents of
France 
Telecom, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Nippon Telephone
and Telegraph 
Corporation, Universite de Sherbrooke (The G.729
Consortium).
3.  Steve was quite right, there are other companies to deal
with: 
Alcatel-Lucent, NEC and Nokia (according to the official
patent call).  
My attorneys are checking this out but for now it appears as
though 
their patents have to do with a specific "process"
of transcoding that 
may not be concern as the "process" seems to have
more to do with their 
respective equipment and DSP use and would not likely be
infringed by a 
more generic implementation as suggested by ITU-T (each
responded to the 
patent call between 1995 and 2000).
4.  I've contacted Qodec.  It's pretty clear that they are
doing what I 
suggested earlier.  They've built a G.729A/B codec in
distributable 
library form and are "planning" to obtain
licensing via Sipro.  The cost 
structure provided to me seems high - higher than Digium to
be sure.  
None-the-less it is significantly less expensive than
re-inventing the 
wheel.

At this time I'm pressing Qodec for implementation and
indemnification 
dates. 

Has anyone on this list build a G.729 implementation using
the Qodec 
API?  It would sure be useful to know if it works.

Jac Barben wrote:
> My attorneys checked this out pretty carefully.  Sipro
represented, in 
> writing, that they are the only proxy for all known
owners of g.729 
> annex a and annex b.  None-the-less, I'll forward your
concerns back 
> to my attorneys  for a double-double  on this.
>
> I'm actually expecting a written "legal
opinion" on the matter this week.
>
> J
>
>
>
> Steve Underwood wrote:
>> Jac Barben wrote:
>>  
>>> All:
>>>
>>> Because G.729 is so important to my world, I've
contacted each of 
>>> Intel and Sipro.  For the benefit of others
that may need licensing 
>>> here are the costs and contacts:
>>>
>>> Intel:
>>> http://www.intel.com/c
d/software/products/asmo-na/eng/download/locations/index.htm
#perflib 
>>>
>>> $199 one time and $80 a year.
>>>       
>> This part is trivial. 
>>  
>>> Sipro:  http://sipro.com
>>> Sipro is handling the G.729/G.723 patents for
all those that claim 
>>> have claimed ownership: France Telecom,
Mitsubishi, Electric 
>>> Corporation, Nippon Telephone and Telegraph
Corporation,Universite 
>>> de Sherbrooke (The G.729 Consortium), NEC and
Nokia.
>>> Typically Sipro charges an annual fee per port
of use.  The killer 
>>> here is the minimum - 1000 ports.  Your entry
fee is: US $9,884.
>>>       
>> Its worse than that. NEC and Nokia are not actually
represented by 
>> Sipro, and you must pay them separately. All Sipro
do is tell you who 
>> you need to contact. NEC and Nokia want about as
much as Sipro, so 
>> you can more or less double the prices Sipro quote.
Unless something 
>> has changed recently, the price you quote is an
illusion brought on 
>> by the confusing way they present things. I seem to
remember it works 
>> out somewhat higher, and then you double it for the
NEC and Nokia part.
>>  
>>> I'm pretty certain that I'm going to have to
step up to these 
>>> costs.  To that end, I am thinking of building
a library of the 
>>> Intel/Sipro work for use with OpenPBX and
distributing the libraries 
>>> for commercial use, as permitted by the
Intel/Sipro licensing, at a 
>>> fee similar to the structure defined by
Digium.
>>> Is there any interest here or am I the only one
with commercial use 
>>> plans?
>>>       
>> We know this needs sorting out. A telephony
platform without G.729 
>> just won't fly at this time. The Freeswitch people
have the same 
>> issue, and we hope we can work with them to a
mutual solution. There 
>> is a company, whose web site name I forgot, which
is providing G.729 
>> for small users like us. There web site makes it
look like they are 
>> dead, but the Freeswitch guys have been in touch
with them, and it 
>> seems they are still active.
>>
>> Since we have plenty to do right now, I've just
been waiting to see 
>> what Freeswitch dredges up as a workable solution.
We intend to 
>> support these things through pipes, with the
transcoder running as a 
>> separate process. That completely avoids licencing
issues with our 
>> pure GPL core, and the overhead is no big deal when
you compare it 
>> against the compute cost of the codec.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steve
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openpbx-dev mailing list
>> Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
>> http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev
>>
>>   
>
_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev

Hi Jac,

I am interested in this, do you have more info about this
(who do we 
have to pay)

Ming-Wei


Jac Barben wrote:
> All:
>
> Because G.729 is so important to my world, I've
contacted each of Intel 
> and Sipro.  For the benefit of others that may need
licensing here are 
> the costs and contacts:
>
> Intel:
> http://www.intel.com/c
d/software/products/asmo-na/eng/download/locations/index.htm
#perflib
> $199 one time and $80 a year.
>
> Sipro:  http://sipro.com
> Sipro is handling the G.729/G.723 patents for all those
that claim have 
> claimed ownership: France Telecom, Mitsubishi, Electric
Corporation, 
> Nippon Telephone and Telegraph Corporation,Universite
de Sherbrooke (The 
> G.729 Consortium), NEC and Nokia.
> Typically Sipro charges an annual fee per port of use. 
The killer here 
> is the minimum - 1000 ports.  Your entry fee is: US
$9,884.
>
> I'm pretty certain that I'm going to have to step up to
these costs.  To 
> that end, I am thinking of building a library of the
Intel/Sipro work 
> for use with OpenPBX and distributing the libraries for
commercial use, 
> as permitted by the Intel/Sipro licensing, at a fee
similar to the 
> structure defined by Digium. 
>
> Is there any interest here or am I the only one with
commercial use plans?
> _______________________________________________
> Openpbx-dev mailing list
> Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
> http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev
>   

_______________________________________________
Openpbx-dev mailing list
Openpbx-devopenpbx.org
http://lists.openpbx.org/mailman/listinfo/openpbx-dev