Re: Convert wma to mp3?

Dan Espen <daneNO@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

"patrick" <pt,ri.c.k@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

In _ATXh.493$Dq6.142@edtnps82">news:_ATXh.493$Dq6.142@edtnps82,
Unruh <unruh-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

a) MP3 is a proprietary patented format at least in the USA and the
holders do NOT allow people to use the patent for encoding via mp3.

You'd better tell that to the authors of the ISO standard, and e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mp3 and
http://sourceforge.net/projects/audacity/

Unruh, you make far, far too many statements in these newsgroups that you
represent as fact, when the only fact is that your statements are downright
false.

Exactly which statement do you regard as false? That MP3 is patented? That
patent holders have the legal right to sue patent violators? That
is is an iso standard is irrelevant.
You might want to havee a look at
http://mp3licensing.com/royalty/software.html
Note that there is NOT exeption listed there either for encoders or
decoders.



I was specifically talking about encoders, which was what the user asked.
Decoders the patent holders have, AFAIK and as mentioned below, given
permission for. Encoders is another story.

On the Lame web site it specifically says "LAME is an educational tool to be
used for learning about MP3 encoding" And the reason is to try to put a
thin veneer on patent issues. I suspect that in law that veneer is very
very thin.

Whether or not the patent holders would actually sue an individual user is
perhaps open to question. That they would have the right to, I do not
believe is open to question.

However if you want to be sure, talk to a patent lawyer. I am not one.

Andyway, Now please tell me which claim you believe to be false.


Interesting.
This part seems to be important:

Additionally, patent holders declined to enforce license fees on open
source decoders, allowing many free MP3 decoders to develop.[citation
needed] Furthermore, while attempts have been made to discourage
distribution of encoder binaries, Thomson has stated that individuals
using free MP3 encoders are not required to pay fees

Note the telling "citation needed". Where is the citation for this claim?



So, downloading and using Lame is unlikely to get an individual user
in trouble. But including Lame in a distro or using Lame in a commercial
enterprise might get someone in trouble.

I think. I'm no lawyer.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Convert wma to mp3?
    ... holders do NOT allow people to use the patent for encoding via mp3. ... patent holders declined to enforce license fees on open ... downloading and using Lame is unlikely to get an individual user ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: DVD Player
    ... > vastly superior deCSS code. ... no mp3 by default since ... The MP3 issue must be caused by US patent law. ... Zustand des Gluecks durch Ausloeschung des Selbst. ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: [opensuse] Goodbye to suse
    ... Not all MP3's involve copyright infringement. ... the reason Novell does not include any MP3 ... software is that the patent holder, Thomson Consumer Electronics, ... could work contractually would be a bulk / blanket license, ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: [opensuse] Goodbye to suse
    ... have to download extra xine codecs off of their multiverse repository. ... Microsoft and Novell going on with these formats and patents. ... It isn't a copyright issue at all, but rather a patent one. ... some good samaritan came out with LAME - Lame Ain't an MP3 ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: Convert wma to mp3?
    ... holders do NOT allow people to use the patent for encoding via mp3. ... violating their patent and in particular the distributions would be ... onto databases in countries where the patent does not apply. ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)