Re: x11amp

[Jules Bean <jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>]

On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 10:22:45PM -0500, ijr@po.cwru.edu wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:02:13PM -0500, Shaleh wrote:
> > >> > Why should it be non-free if it's GPL?
> > >> 
> > >> the mp3 patent
> > > 
> > > Decoding has been given free license...  It's the mp3 ENcoders that are
> > > non-free.
> > 
> > Actually, according to their FAQ, Fraunhoffer is choosing not to enforce their
> > patents on the decoding process at this time.  They could do so whenever they
> > choose.
> 
> Patents are like Copyrights in this regard...  Use it or lose it.  By not
> enforcing any patent to decoders they might have, they essentially have
> given up this right.  That FAQ is all the legal defense you need should
> they ever start enforcing them.

Copyrights aren't like that. You're thinking of trademarks, I expect.
Trademarks need to be enforced.  Copyright is absolute.

I don't know where patents stand - I think they are like copyrights, i.e.
- absolute.

In any case, there can be no patent on mp3 decoding.  MP3 encoding is a
complex algorithm.  MP3 decoding is just a fourier transform, and it is
ridiculous to suggest that could be patented.

Which is not to say that it might not be, in some jurisdiction, but it is
to say that I find it hard to believe it would be upheld.

Jules


/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
|  Jelibean aka  | jules@jellybean.co.uk         |  6 Evelyn Rd	       |
|  Jules aka     | jules@debian.org              |  Richmond, Surrey   |
|  Julian Bean   | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk        |  TW9 2TF *UK*       |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
|  War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left.             |
|  When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy.          |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/