SOLVED: XMMS and the new MP3 patent terms
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Sep 01, 2002 at 06:24:27PM +0200, Balazs Javor wrote:
> I'm not sure whether the administrative overhead makes this worth it,
> but did it occure to someone, that somebody could sell the mp3 plugin
> for XMMS or other players for a nominal fee of say USD 1, and then
> pay the 75 cents to Thompson?
OK, I *know* it's been mentioned in the thread already, but in case
people somehow missed it, the patent holders clarified thier
position on August 29th, and I'm really getting tired of this thread.
In short, nothing changed for software. If it wasn't GPL compatible
before, it never was. This dies here.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/08/29/1718237&mode=nocomment
Thomson: MP3 Licensing Same As It Ever Was
NewsPosted by timothy on Thursday August 29, @10:55AM
from the gosh-all-we-changed-was-some-words-and-stuff dept.
Thomson Multimedia is downplaying the recently reported change in the
licensing of patented MP3 technology as nothing more than a trivial,
semantic change. In a NewsForge report today, Robin ("roblimo") Miller
quotes a spokesman who denies that any change in the licensing terms
has taken place, "that Thomson laid down its licensing terms long ago,
and that if Thomson's terms are not compatible with the GPL today,
then they never were." The patent encumbrance of MP3 codecs has
worried Free software enthusiasts for a long time; if the recent
wording change represents no change in policy, it seems that they
really have been right all along. (NewsForge, like Slashdot, is part
of the sinister OSDN keiretsu.)
- --
Baloo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9cskxNtWkM9Ny9xURAoGsAJ9VnNxGOCOz2dpYNXyDyr0XKPQ8ngCaAziv
i6CdaxrG3ksqnx/oVOPZZOw=
=q+gp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: