[vorbis] requested new features ?

[Marshall Eubanks]

David Mitchell wrote:
> 
> Matt and Karin Lawson wrote:
> >
> > The website is:
> >      http://www.mp3licensing.com
> >
> > Basically the deal is that you can stream mp3s for free until the end of the
> > year but after that, they start charging a royalty with a MINIMUM annual
> > payment of $15,000.  If you also want to sell downloads, it's 1% of your
> > sales with another annual minimum fee of $15,000.
> >
> > Now remember these fees are only for the use of the mp3 technology
> > itself, it doesn't include the myriad of royalties that are due to the various
> > record companies, publishers, performing rights organizations, etc..
> >
> > Realize that this also means that if you want to sell and stream YOUR
> > OWN MUSIC that you personally wrote, performed, and recorded
> > in your house, that adds up to $30,000 per year.  You see how
> > absurd this is?
> 
> I'm curious what gives them the authority to license MP3
> downloads? If I am selling .mp3 files, how would that be affected
> by patents on audio encoding and decoding techniques? This may be
> a stupid question, but an .mp3 file is not an encoder. And a .mp3
> file is not a decoder. So why do their patents apply at all?
> 
> As an analogy, lets say I patent a new method for binding books.
> It works great, saves the publishers a ton of money, and they all
> license it. Great. I'm making money. My patent is being licensed.
> But, my lawyers tell me I have a problem. Bookstores are selling
> books made with my patented binding without a license! Do I have
> any right to demand that they pay me royalties? If so, can I also
> demand royalties from the truckers who ship the books? Can I
> demand royalties from the reviewers who review the books? Can I
> demand royalties from the trashmen who carry away the books after
> they are read? Can I demand royalties from the people who read
> the books? How far does this nonsense go?
> 
> Back to MP3's. As long as I am using a properly licensed encoder,
> what say does Thompson have about what I do with that encoder? It
> seems to me that their lawyers are making up "rights" out of thin
> air and trying to license them. Oh well, this is probably a good
> thing for Vorbis. After all, the more heavy handed and demanding
> Thompson and Frh are, the better the competition looks.
> 
> -David Mitchell
> 
They basically claim that if you want to USE an
encoder with their technology, you have to follow their
rules. It is probable (not certain - that would take court cases) 
that you cannot make MP3's without their technology, therefore
they can claim a license right to payments.

I personally think that they are being stupid; it would not
be the first time, though. 

                                   Regards
                                   Marshall Eubanks

  

   T.M. Eubanks
   Multicast Technologies, Inc.
   10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410
   Fairfax, Virginia 22030
   Phone : 703-293-9624
   Fax     : 703-293-9609

   e-mail : tme at on-the-i.com     

        http://www.on-the-i.com         http://www.buzzwaves.com

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.