3 ms·

> Any licensing fee paid to a single company is unacceptable for what is described as an "open standard." ... do you understand how out of touch this is? Every

> Any licensing fee paid to a single company is unacceptable for what is described as an "open standard." ... do you understand how out of touch this is? Every single recent "public standard" will absolutely require paying license fees to some company, or often a whole pool of companies. This is simply how things are done, designing things cost money and that money is recouped through licensing. The key part is that the licenses are FRAND, or Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminating.

throw0101b 3y ago
> ... do you understand how out of touch this is? Every single recent "public standard" will absolutely require paying license fees to some company, or often a whole pool of companies. If the fee is to one company, it is usually an industry non-profit (HDMI, Bluetooth) that doesn't itself have a stake in the outcome. If it's a pool of companies they also have to hash things out amongst themselves and no one company will have control over another. Neither of these situations apply to Tesla and 'NACS'. If Tesla wants to give up control of 'NACS' to SAE or IEC, then we can talk.
- ajdude 3y ago
  You might be sad to hear that the latest standard of over the air (antenna) TV utilizes ATSC 3 audio, requiring tuners to pay 70 licensing fees so you'll have sound with your TV. I don't get audio when I use my DVR on Plex because of that.
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    > utilizes ATSC 3 audio There is no such thing as ATSC 3 audio. ATSC is the transmission standard, either ATSC 1 (basically everywhere, 1080p) or ATSC 3 in some cities ("Next-Gen TV", 4K). ATSC 1 uses Dolby Digital AC-3, ATSC 3 uses Dolby AC-4 which is otherwise quite rare. Also, that's a very light example. Look into the patent situation for H.264 / AVC, H.265 / HEVC. They are Open Standards (you can download the documentation right now), but they are patent minefields to implement, with dozens of companies and hundreds, if not thousands of patents. Also, to reply to the comment above you: > If the fee is to one company, it is usually an industry non-profit (HDMI, Bluetooth) that doesn't itself have a stake in the outcome. If it's a pool of companies they also have to hash things out amongst themselves and no one company will have control over another. What? HDMI is not an open standard - you need to pay to get the documentation, pass certification, and pay a royalty fee per device (about 5-15 cents per connector). You also need to license the logo because HDMI is actually a brand. Sure, anyone can get HDMI, but it sure ain't open. And if it's a TV or a monitor, better license HDCP separately. Also, as for Bluetooth... that was a patent minefield for decades.

throw0101b 3y ago

> ... do you understand how out of touch this is? Every single recent "public standard" will absolutely require paying license fees to some company, or often a whole pool of companies. If the fee is to one company, it is usually an industry non-profit (HDMI, Bluetooth) that doesn't itself have a stake in the outcome. If it's a pool of companies they also have to hash things out amongst themselves and no one company will have control over another. Neither of these situations apply to Tesla and 'NACS'. If Tesla wants to give up control of 'NACS' to SAE or IEC, then we can talk.

ajdude 3y ago
You might be sad to hear that the latest standard of over the air (antenna) TV utilizes ATSC 3 audio, requiring tuners to pay 70 licensing fees so you'll have sound with your TV. I don't get audio when I use my DVR on Plex because of that.
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  > utilizes ATSC 3 audio There is no such thing as ATSC 3 audio. ATSC is the transmission standard, either ATSC 1 (basically everywhere, 1080p) or ATSC 3 in some cities ("Next-Gen TV", 4K). ATSC 1 uses Dolby Digital AC-3, ATSC 3 uses Dolby AC-4 which is otherwise quite rare. Also, that's a very light example. Look into the patent situation for H.264 / AVC, H.265 / HEVC. They are Open Standards (you can download the documentation right now), but they are patent minefields to implement, with dozens of companies and hundreds, if not thousands of patents. Also, to reply to the comment above you: > If the fee is to one company, it is usually an industry non-profit (HDMI, Bluetooth) that doesn't itself have a stake in the outcome. If it's a pool of companies they also have to hash things out amongst themselves and no one company will have control over another. What? HDMI is not an open standard - you need to pay to get the documentation, pass certification, and pay a royalty fee per device (about 5-15 cents per connector). You also need to license the logo because HDMI is actually a brand. Sure, anyone can get HDMI, but it sure ain't open. And if it's a TV or a monitor, better license HDCP separately. Also, as for Bluetooth... that was a patent minefield for decades.