[sudhirj]

We have a license and use them for satellite broadcasting, but my understanding is Qualcomm has made statements in https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1511/ that if you use it for a "wireless wide-area standard (for example, a UMTS-compatible handset or Infrastructure equipment)" you'll be charged a standard royalty fee, otherwise they don't care.

[ignoramous]

Noob question: Any reason folks would use FountainCode/RaptorQ over TurboCode [0] / PolarCode [1]? What's the difference?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_code

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_code_(coding_theory)

[krastanov]

I do not think the "non-fountain" style of error correction has the nice property of "just grab any reasonable fraction of the packets and you will get to decode the whole message". With a Turbo/LDPC/Polar/etc code you encode a packet, send it, and when it is received it is either decoded or not, but there is no notion of a message spread redundantly over many packets, where any n of them are enough for the decoding of the full message.

[detaro]

... as long as you use it for implementing a specific IETF specification. At least that how it reads to me?

[sudhirj]

Sure, I guess? I don't see why you'd want to deviate from the RFC6330 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6330 - stuff like this is complicated a.f.