[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?

* Ron Johnson:

>> Yet mpg321 is in main.  This comes from the misunderstanding that no
>> royalties are required for decoders (as opposed to encoders).  This is
>> not true, though.
>> The MP3 situtation is even worse, there are two organizations holding
>> pools of essential patents on MP3, and you need separate licenses from
>> both.  One organization is enforcing its patents actively against
>> redistributors of MP3 players in Europe.
> So, in addition to non-US, now we need non-EU !!  :)

MP3 is so thoroughly patent-encumbered that Debian really shouldn't
encourage anyone to distribute binary packages.

The concept of non-* is a questionable one since the crypto issues has
been resolved.  For a start, most US software patents have JP
equivalents, so non-US is a misnomer.  What's worse, Debian doesn't
have a convincing policy with respect to software patents.  This is
not really Debian's fault because the whole patent area is so murky
and lacks clear answers (even if you pay $$$ to patent lawyers), but
it's annoying nevertheless.

Reply to: