Algorithms, not LAME, Subject to Licensing Fees?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Inhibit Jul 12, 2006 6:47 AM EDT |
Correct me if I'm wrong here as I've probably got less legalese under my belt than others. Isn't it the algorithms incorporated into LAME, not the software, that are subject to licensing fees (potentially)? So it wouldn't be that the code itself needs to be licensed, just the distribution rights for the Algos, which wouldn't create a GPLv2 snafu as the code is free and clear. |
| jdixon Jul 12, 2006 7:03 AM EDT |
> Isn't it the algorithms incorporated into LAME, not the software, that are subject to licensing fees My understanding is that at least some of the alogortihms are patented, yes. If so, then the alogrithms cannot be used without a license, regardless of the code used to implement them. At least, that's my understanding, but IANAL. |
| grouch Jul 12, 2006 7:24 AM EDT |
jdixon: Same understanding here. Patents apply to the idea, regardless of the implementation. This is part of what makes software patents so abhorrent. |
| SFN Jul 12, 2006 7:27 AM EDT |
OK, so it's the algorithms used in LAME that are the problem, not LAME itself. But LAME uses those algorithms so using LAME creates the same problem as using the algorithms themselves. Isn't that right? |
| jdixon Jul 12, 2006 7:51 AM EDT |
> But LAME uses those algorithms so using LAME creates the same problem as using the algorithms themselves. Isn't that right? Not exactly. Using lame IS using the algorithms themselves. Lame is an implementation of the algorithms. But, it's even worse than that. By my understanding, it's not just the algorithm that's patented, but the result. You can't even use another algorithm that gives you the same result without licensing the patent. So any implementation, not just lame's would require a license. Again, IANAL. Of couse, civil disobedience is always an option, but I can't advocate that in a public space. |
| SFN Jul 12, 2006 8:01 AM EDT |
And by result you mean any MP3 file, correct? |
| jimf Jul 12, 2006 8:17 AM EDT |
Say what you want, but as a Linux user, the status of various multimedia and sound code is quite disturbing. Lame is problematic, mp3 is proprietary (even tho it should be public domain), mpg, avi, and wmv are all proprietary... I may be wrong, but if we were to adhere strictly to the GPL, We'd all be listening to ogg 'period'. So much for Linux multimedia... |
| grouch Jul 12, 2006 8:26 AM EDT |
I wouldn't touch WMV with a remotely controlled 10m pole. Ogg is superior to it in quality, anyway. |
| jimf Jul 12, 2006 8:29 AM EDT |
> I wouldn't touch WMV with a remotely controlled 10m pole. No argument, but that doesn't address the issue. You are cutting yourself off from a lot of data. |
| grouch Jul 12, 2006 9:02 AM EDT |
If the data is locked within that monkey trap, I don't want it. I've cut myself off from the experience of a fine cigar in conjunction with a gasoline martini, too, but I don't regret the loss. There is absolutely nothing within the MS world that holds any lure for me. I've seen the traps; I experienced many years of the consequences of falling for those traps. Free software is an antidote to the poisonous policies of Microsoft and its ilk. You do not have to sign your property over to Bill Gates in order to use free software. You do not have to grant Bill Gates root access to your computer and your personal data in order to use free software. You must do these things to use Microsoft products. WMV is only one tiny part of Microsoft's spyware and digital restrictions regime. |
| jimf Jul 12, 2006 9:09 AM EDT |
Hey grouch, don't get hung on the wmv/ms thing. If that was the only problem I agree completly. We still have severe issues with all of the other formats. |
| grouch Jul 12, 2006 9:21 AM EDT |
jimf: Sorry. You touched a button. It has been known for a long time that MS Windows Media Player is spyware and was one of the precursor elements of MS's sellout of customers to the MAFIAA. There is ample evidence, spread over nearly 2 decades, that every product and action of Microsoft has an ulterior motive behind the ones marketed. Every product, including codecs, is first and foremost a weapon with which MS continues its predatory actions on other businesses and its customers. It is secondarily a marketing tool. The tertiary purpose is to solve some customer need. I will not touch WMV with a remotely controlled 10m pole. |
| jdixon Jul 12, 2006 10:28 AM EDT |
> And by result you mean any MP3 file, correct? Yes. Again though, IANAL. So take with the appropriate amount of salt. |
| jimf Jul 12, 2006 11:55 AM EDT |
My understanding is that LAME 'is' a compression algorithm. |
| Inhibit Jul 12, 2006 12:01 PM EDT |
It's a library that implements a compression algorithm for MP3s. So I'm still wondering if this actually conflicts it with the GPL just because the algo requires a license or if it's OK because the implementation doesn't require any licensing, just the algorithm's use. Heh. And yea. That's a really horrible thing. Whoever thought allowing patents on obvious algorithms based on usage needs a swift kick. |
| jimf Jul 12, 2006 12:08 PM EDT |
> It's a library that implements a compression algorithm for MP3s. Close enough for this simple mind... Tks Inhibit :) |
| jdixon Jul 12, 2006 12:18 PM EDT |
> So I'm still wondering if this actually conflicts it with the GPL just because the algo requires a license... Well, this is a fine point, and subject to both disagreement and misunderstanding. As I understand it, the GPL doesn't allow you to impose any further restrictions on usage, modification, or redistribution of the code. The LAME coders aren't doing so, but since the entire field is covered by a patent, you need a license from the patent holder to legally use or redistribute the code. This is not compatible with the GPL. But there's nothing in the LAME code that conflicts with the GPL at all. The conflict is entirely the result of the patent on the MP3 technology. |
| JackieBrown Jul 12, 2006 4:24 PM EDT |
I was wonder what excuse he would use to delay this. None of his releases have been on time. And what's the point of making sure all the packages are fully compliant with the GPL when his packages are still closed? |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!