[MP3 ENCODER] mp3 synchronization

2001-12-20 Thread Manoj Palki
Hi, I am trying to stream mp3 files using RTP. At present each RTP frame has exactly one mp3 frame (starting from synchronization word and ending at the next sync word). This audio will have to be synchronized with video. Is there some way of calculating the starttime and the time duration of e

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Alexander Leidinger
On 20 Dez, Gabriel Bouvigne wrote: > 1 step forward for Lame, but 1 step backward for freedom: > > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8225543.html?tag=hot ---snip--- The digital files are contained in a single "CDS" file format, which is not explained. But in the license agreement for the tech

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Alexander Leidinger
On 20 Dez, Steve Lhomme wrote: > They don't give reasons why they use LAME. But I'm really curious to know. > I'm not sure if it's really legal to use LAME for commercial selling of the > encoded files (because of the patents on MP3). More interesting: ---snip--- * INTERNATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Alexander Leidinger
On 20 Dez, Stanislav O¹mera wrote: > Gabriel Bouvigne wrote: > >>1 step forward for Lame, but 1 step backward for freedom: >> >>http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8225543.html?tag=hot >>http://www.musichelponline.com/legal/ >> > It's first CD in USA with this ?(cactus data shield protection) I'

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Alexander Leidinger
On 20 Dez, Steve Lhomme wrote: > They don't give reasons why they use LAME. But I'm really curious to know. Perhaps because they just provide encrypted mp3s? > I'm not sure if it's really legal to use LAME for commercial selling of the > encoded files (because of the patents on MP3). They can

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Gabriel Bouvigne
> They don't give reasons why they use LAME. But I'm really curious to know. > I'm not sure if it's really legal to use LAME for commercial selling of the > encoded files (because of the patents on MP3). They're probably using Lame because it's saving money compared to FhG. For sure it's legal to

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Stanislav Ošmera
Gabriel Bouvigne wrote: >1 step forward for Lame, but 1 step backward for freedom: > >http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8225543.html?tag=hot >http://www.musichelponline.com/legal/ > It's first CD in USA with this ?(cactus data shield protection) I'm wondering. Here in europe (Czech Republick)

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Steve Lhomme
Quoting Gabriel Bouvigne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 1 step forward for Lame, but 1 step backward for freedom: > > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8225543.html?tag=hot > http://www.musichelponline.com/legal/ They don't give reasons why they use LAME. But I'm really curious to know. I'm not sure

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread David Nordin
Is the cactus protection system really that effective? or are we to expect some sort of a crack in the nearlying future? perhaps something that would be implementable to EAC? /Cheers: David At 08:50 2001-12-20 Thursday +0100, you wrote: >1 step forward for Lame, but 1 step backward for freedom:

[MP3 ENCODER] Lame recognition

2001-12-20 Thread Gabriel Bouvigne
1 step forward for Lame, but 1 step backward for freedom: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8225543.html?tag=hot http://www.musichelponline.com/legal/ Gabriel Bouvigne www.mp3-tech.org ___ mp3encoder mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://minnie