[matroska-general] Re: Matroska in Adobe products / make Matroska a legal entity
steve.lhomme at free.fr
Fri Feb 28 11:33:55 CET 2003
En réponse à Christian HJ Wiesner <chris at matroska.org>:
> There is a problem with founding a company like Corecodec Inc. :
> A company is allowed to raise money and make profit, and if we consider
> founding matroska Inc. than everybody ( especially Xiph ) will shoot at
> us pretty quickly, trying to make other people believe we are trying to
> establish matroska as a standard now, to make money with it once it is
> widely used.
Well, AFAIK Xiph signs NDA even though they are a non-profit organisation. so
the difference is very thin. They make business the same way as a company
(selling a special version of their sources). The thing is that with a non
profit org, we cannot develop all the things we want, the way we want.
My point of view on the future of our work, is that I'd like to get enough money
to pay a few of us to continue develop and expand our scope of development (UCI,
porting to other architectures, MPC work, VDubMod support of more Matroska
eatures, I also have other multimedia projects in mind). But still making the
sources available for free to use in open softwares (the QPL philosophy). I'm
not sure a non profit org can do that... Even though that's exactly what
> I clearly vote for a non-profit organisation, such as an Association.
> Here in Germany we can even expect support for such a non-profit
> organisation from the government, if you can prove to them that you are
> 'serving the community' , like founding a medical service as a
> non-profit organisation, or the like.
Well, yes, this could be a good/fair source of funding.
> Unfortunately the name would then be
> matroska e.V.
> ( e.V. = eingetragener Verein = registered association )
> and i fear nobody else in the world than Germans will understand what
> form of an entity we are, and this may cause problems if any company
> would decide to support matroska in their products.
I don't think it really matters. We could call it matroska.org a suffix won't
> I would consider to make the very same thing in France, that is to
> matroska association
> ( association = French equivalent to non-profit organisation ? )
Yes. We don't have to put Association in the name AFAIK.
> Founding members could be
> Steve LHomme
> John Cannon ( only if he gets the MPEG muxer working :P )
> Julien Coloos
> Moritz Bunkus
> Ludovic Vialle
> Christian Wiesner
> If anybody feels he wants to be in this list also, please reply here.
> I could drive to Paris or Lyon easily to sign the foundation document if
> necessary, although i dont know if this is required for all founding
> members. Can somebody sitting in France find out for us please, as Steve
> and Cyrius are busy coding ? Ciler ? Oxy ?
Or maybe Ludovic, is back in metropolitan France soon and will probably be
unemployed for some time. We could all go to Toulouse (south of France) for the
launch :) But well, he already runs CoreCodec Inc so maybe there would be a
conflict of interrests (or blur).
> My next thing to look at will be the protection of the matroska brand
> name and logos, to avoid any big company can simply steal our work and
> market it ( they had to rewrite the code, thats all ... its problematic
> to save the specs, as we dont have any things in there that could be
> patented, so anybody can 'ab'use them for his purposes ).
That's one part I'm not sure a non profit organisation can do.
> Comments welcome, from anybody reading this list !!
More information about the Matroska-general