[MPlayer-users] Re: Re: thinking about mpeg4 licence etc.

[Clemens Wächter]

> On 2 Jun 2002, gabor wrote:
> > > Patents apply to every implementation (unlike copyright). So even if
> > > you code it from scratch, you are still bound by the patents.
> >
> > ok, but then what about lame?
> >
> > it's an mp3 encoder... i don't think they pay anything to frauenhofer...
> 
> IANAL, but I think that patents apply to the _use_ of the software,
> not the distribution. So if _you_ use it, _you_ have to get a patent
> license.
> 

well,
lame ain't an MP3 encoder....
no it isn't, it is a patch which is somehow not bound to that law...
looks like it. It is a patch and not a working program. It doesn't even
produce a mp3 stream.

Or at least it was.

Now its a fully working program, and they found a nice hole in the laws
which protected them from FhG and all others.

I dont know why Lame semms to be or is legal but at least they are not
threatened by FhG, just look at what happened to bladeenc, it soon disappeared
after the lawyers callt the author(s). 
And lame is well-known, so FhG should at least be aware of the existence of
lame.


Hope it will be the same for mpeg4 derivates, but I think there won't be any
problems.


Clemens Wächter