Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
I know that Lame and BladeEnc are entirely coded from scratch, and so are not using any proprietary code. As I have said before, I am not a lawyer, but I have read time and time again that MP3 is a proprietary format (much like GIF and Windows Media are). Thompson have a site dedicated to MP3 licensing, appropriately located at http://www.mp3licensing.com/. Much of it is deliberate marketing fluff, and so is rather vague. While originally designed by the MPEG group (which is an ISO group), it now looks like Thompson charge royalties for encoders and players, as well as for distribution (http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/index.html). If you click on the links there you will see that they charge patent-only royalties (among others available) in case the mp3 software used for such products is developed in-house or licensed from a third party. In other words, this excludes Fraunhofer software, which is covered by a patent and software license (This patent and software license license covers patents and mp3 software (source code) developed by Fraunhofer IIS-A.). On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 03:27, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Thanks. I was reading on the site you posted (very interesting btw). However the material there bears out my original assertion that the MP3 format itself is not proprietary. It is by definition open. (unless I'm now confusing discussions, it's crazy trying to keep track of so many responses...) The problem lies with the legalities of the encoders and to a lesser extent the decoders. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:41 AM To: Jose M. Sanchez; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:40, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Interesting. Why would a source distribution be ok, whereas a binary not? It is apparently some sort of legal loophole. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know the specifics on this. What about CDEX? I had a quick look around the CDEX website (http://www.cdex.n3.net). They are using Lame as their encoder, and they have a binary version available for download. I don't know if what they are doing is legal. Maybe it is not illegal in their part of the world. Most countries _don't_ have any software copyright law, but many accept the US law. What about WinAmp's plugin which is not Franhoffer based nor has royalties associated with it? I don't know about this. Perhaps AOL (the owners of Winamp) are subsidising it so they can advertise to Winamp users. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 10:40 PM To: Jose M. Sanchez; 'Kevin Fonner'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? The alternatives are only legal through various technicalities. For example, the BladeEnc encoder is distributed in source form only (just look at their web site). Making a binary would violate US patent law. Try looking for BladeEnc or Lame (the most popular MP3 encoders) on rpmfind.net and see what you come up with. It is more difficult to find the latest MP3 encoder packages (particularly for US distros) than it is to find other normal packages. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan. There are two major products that come from Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:40, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Interesting. Why would a source distribution be ok, whereas a binary not? It is apparently some sort of legal loophole. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know the specifics on this. What about CDEX? I had a quick look around the CDEX website (http://www.cdex.n3.net). They are using Lame as their encoder, and they have a binary version available for download. I don't know if what they are doing is legal. Maybe it is not illegal in their part of the world. Most countries _don't_ have any software copyright law, but many accept the US law. What about WinAmp's plugin which is not Franhoffer based nor has royalties associated with it? I don't know about this. Perhaps AOL (the owners of Winamp) are subsidising it so they can advertise to Winamp users. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 10:40 PM To: Jose M. Sanchez; 'Kevin Fonner'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? The alternatives are only legal through various technicalities. For example, the BladeEnc encoder is distributed in source form only (just look at their web site). Making a binary would violate US patent law. Try looking for BladeEnc or Lame (the most popular MP3 encoders) on rpmfind.net and see what you come up with. It is more difficult to find the latest MP3 encoder packages (particularly for US distros) than it is to find other normal packages. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan. There are two major products that come from Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://.mandrakestore.com
RE: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
Thanks. I was reading on the site you posted (very interesting btw). However the material there bears out my original assertion that the MP3 format itself is not proprietary. It is by definition open. (unless I'm now confusing discussions, it's crazy trying to keep track of so many responses...) The problem lies with the legalities of the encoders and to a lesser extent the decoders. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 9:41 AM To: Jose M. Sanchez; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? On Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:40, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Interesting. Why would a source distribution be ok, whereas a binary not? It is apparently some sort of legal loophole. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know the specifics on this. What about CDEX? I had a quick look around the CDEX website (http://www.cdex.n3.net). They are using Lame as their encoder, and they have a binary version available for download. I don't know if what they are doing is legal. Maybe it is not illegal in their part of the world. Most countries _don't_ have any software copyright law, but many accept the US law. What about WinAmp's plugin which is not Franhoffer based nor has royalties associated with it? I don't know about this. Perhaps AOL (the owners of Winamp) are subsidising it so they can advertise to Winamp users. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 10:40 PM To: Jose M. Sanchez; 'Kevin Fonner'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? The alternatives are only legal through various technicalities. For example, the BladeEnc encoder is distributed in source form only (just look at their web site). Making a binary would violate US patent law. Try looking for BladeEnc or Lame (the most popular MP3 encoders) on rpmfind.net and see what you come up with. It is more difficult to find the latest MP3 encoder packages (particularly for US distros) than it is to find other normal packages. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan. There are two major products that come from Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
On Monday, Aug 13, 2001, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: What about WinAmp's plugin which is not Franhoffer based nor has royalties associated with it? The plugin that comes with WinAmp is a decoder, not an encoder. They don't mind you listening to an .mp3, it's creating one that's the problem. There is an .mp3 encoder plugin for WinAmp, but from the readme.txt that comes with it: Getting the ACM codec if you don't already have it: We can't provide the mp3 encoding software here due to patent and copyright reasons, but you can find the proper software on the internet. Opticom (http://www.opticom.de) sells the professional version of the Fraunhoffer codec. You can also download Microsoft's Netshow tools, which has an advanced (read: lower bitrates only) codec included in it. It's about 4 megabytes, and free. http://mskyus.www.conxion.com/msdownload/netshow/3.01/x86/en/nstools.exe Also, from the Ogg Vorbis FAQ: Why Vorbis? MP3 is open. No, it isn't. Fraunhofer (and other MPEG consortium members) claim that it is impossible to create an mp3 encoder without infringing on their patents. To create/use an encoder, the law says one must pay royalties to Fraunhofer and other MPEG Consortium members. In other words, you can play what you like, but you're not allowed to contribute without paying the ante. MPEG-4, destined to be the next generation of internet audio, is even more tightly controlled. More worrisome is the prospect of behind the scenes alliances between MPEG (which dominates the audio technology) with the RIAA/music industry which seeks to control all distribution. Do you really want a corporate alliance controlling what music you can listen to and when? Remember that the RIAA is working hard to make players that play anything other than officially sanctioned streams illegal. -- Paul Cox paul at coxcentral dot com Kernel: 2.4.7-8mdk - Uptime: 1 day 13 hours 12 minutes. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://.mandrakestore.com
RE: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
Maybe you can clarify a point. Either in this discussion or another I recently had, we were debating the legalities of the MP3 file format itself. I asserted that the MP3 FILE format was not considered to be proprietary since it was by definition open. Now I've been convinced that the problem lies in the encoder decoder patents held by Fraunhoffer which is really the big problem... However, I'm still splitting this hair... According to the postings, you COULD theoretically create a MP3 encoder which does not violate Fraunhoffer's supposed patents, though as stated, this would be next to impossible... In turn this implies that the file format itself is not covered by the patents. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Paul Cox Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 11:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? On Monday, Aug 13, 2001, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: What about WinAmp's plugin which is not Franhoffer based nor has royalties associated with it? The plugin that comes with WinAmp is a decoder, not an encoder. They don't mind you listening to an .mp3, it's creating one that's the problem. There is an .mp3 encoder plugin for WinAmp, but from the readme.txt that comes with it: -- Paul Cox paul at coxcentral dot com Kernel: 2.4.7-8mdk - Uptime: 1 day 13 hours 12 minutes. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
On Monday, Aug 13, 2001, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Now I've been convinced that the problem lies in the encoder decoder patents held by Fraunhoffer which is really the big problem... However, I'm still splitting this hair... According to the postings, you COULD theoretically create a MP3 encoder which does not violate Fraunhoffer's supposed patents, though as stated, this would be next to impossible... In turn this implies that the file format itself is not covered by the patents. To be honest, I have no idea. =) I just posted what I read on the ogg website and that mp3 encoder for winamp. mmm... searching on the net, found some info on www.mp3licensing.com. I think the most important part is this: Note: No license is needed for private, non-commercial activities (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration of any kind or for entities with an annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00. So it sounds like someone encoding for their one use is ok. However, the company (or person) that made the encoder is NOT using it for private use (since they distributed it), therefore, they do need a license. -- Paul Cox paul at coxcentral dot com Kernel: 2.4.7-8mdk - Uptime: 1 day 16 hours 39 minutes. Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://.mandrakestore.com
RE: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
Eh, I don't think this is accurate. MP3 formats nor the MPEG format are proprietary... It was defined by a consortium Which is why there are so many legal alternatives to Fraunhoffer's encoder... Fraunhoffer's encoder ITSELF is proprietary, not it's output. BTW: other MP3/MPEG encoders are available at RPMfind, which work great with grip and other programs... -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sridhar Dhanapalan Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 1:34 AM To: Kevin Fonner; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? The MP3 format is patented by the Fraunhoffer (spelling?) Institute. If Mandrake included MP3 encoders they would have to pay royalties to Fraunhoffer. You can look up lame or bladenc at rpmfind.net, or for the latest versions you can compile your own. Better yet, use Ogg Vorbis. This format is 100% open source (so there are no royalties) and features twice the compression of MP3 with the same quality (or double the quality at the same size). On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 13:21, Kevin Fonner wrote: I noticed grip is part of the mandrake installation and so is cdpar* for ripping music off the cd. However why are their not any mp3encoder's installed nor on the cd's. Where can I get an rpm for mandrake to encode the mp3's? -- Sridhar Dhanapalan. There are two major products that come from Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- Jeremy S. Anderson
RE: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Eh, I don't think this is accurate. MP3 formats nor the MPEG format are proprietary... It was defined by a consortium Which is why there are so many legal alternatives to Fraunhoffer's encoder... Fraunhoffer's encoder ITSELF is proprietary, not it's output. So why is bladeenc illegal in the US then? I thought that was not based on Fraunhoffers encoder? peace, Rog
RE: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing???
I can't speak about this with any great authority... But WinAMP (and other US distributed players such as Sonique) include MP3 encoding modules which are not Fraunhoffer based and there have been no patent lawsuits concerning this. In fact if the MP3 format were proprietary EVERY MP3 encoder decoder would also need to pay royalties to Fraunhoffer. CDEX for instance advertises itself as a legal free encoder... How can this be if the MP3 format itself is proprietary. There are plenty of hardware MP3 encoding and decoding IC's which do not use Fraunhoffer AFAIK. -JMS -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Roger Sherman Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 5:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [newbie] mp3 encoder missing??? On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Jose M. Sanchez wrote: Eh, I don't think this is accurate. MP3 formats nor the MPEG format are proprietary... It was defined by a consortium Which is why there are so many legal alternatives to Fraunhoffer's encoder... Fraunhoffer's encoder ITSELF is proprietary, not it's output. So why is bladeenc illegal in the US then? I thought that was not based on Fraunhoffers encoder? peace, Rog
