Slashdot Mirror


Thomson: MP3 Licensing Same As It Ever Was

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.)

4 of 310 comments (clear)

  1. Free softare is compatible with business? by MaxVlast · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm intrigued that people are all about OSS not being opposed to business or profit, as long as it's done in a reasonable, open way.

    At the same time, though, we see the "Red Hat = Microsoft?" articles and the subtle opposition to anything that is 'tainted' by capitalism (sinister OSDN [not that it isn't a keiretsu], etc.) I've since decided that open source people are simply disinclined toward business and there will always be a bulk of people who can't fathom that things can be both commercial and open and will make a fuss about it as a result, despite whatever benefits the continue to enjoy.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
  2. the right tool for the right job by tps12 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I know a bunch of people are pissed about MP3 and its licensing and so forth. I think it's a valid complaint. After all, I'm a long-time ex-Windows user, so I know what it's like to get frustrated with the people who make your software.

    But when it comes right down to it, you have to choose the right tool for the right job. A lot of times, at client sites where I'd rather use Linux or BSD/OS, I have to go with Win2k, just because the required featureset (ASP, database connectivity, CGI) demands IIS. I think we need to recognize that MP3 is an established and important technology for digital music. Would it be nice if it were all public domain, or GPLed? Of course. But you can't always get what you want, and in this case we have to settle for MP3 with the knowledge that it is truly the appropriate tool for the job at hand.

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
  3. Author is violating the GPL by mbrubeck · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Let's say I publish a program containing an MP3 decoder. If I release my code under the GNU GPL, I thereby declare that recipients of the code have all the rights granted by the GPL. But I don't have the authority to grant them those rights, because some of the code is covered by the Thomson patents.

    This is especially bad if my program contains code written by other programmers and released under the GPL. These programmers could then sue me for incorporating their code into software that is not freely redistributable as required by the GPL.

    The GNU GPL anticipates this issue, and explicitly states in section 7:

    For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

    By the way, this is not a hypothetical issue for me. I'm a developer of Audacity, a GPL program that includes the MAD mp3 decoder. We are currently discussing the situation on the development mailing list. See this message for a discussion of some options we are considering.

  4. Re:What in sweet, slinky Jesus is keiretsu? by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's like "Zaibatsu" (though surely someone who knows Japanese will correct me on how different the words really are; I have heard them used interchangeably, but only by Americans speaking English, and do not know Japanese). See also this game:
    (//www.angelfire.com/games3/errantknight/zaibats u/ )


    Well, I don't know *that* much Japanese, but I'll try...

    The zaibatsu were powerful financial and business cartels that formed during the Meiji period (1880s-ish to 1945) The defining characteristic was that zaibatsu were family-owned, usually by rich and powerful members of the samurai class. During the American occupation after WWII, the huge holding companies that glued the pieces of the zaibatsu together were liquidated and sold off piecemeal. During the 1960s and 1970s, similar huge mega-conglomerates emerged again. These are the kieretsu. The main difference is that they are (mostly) publicly traded companies, not dominated by any one family like the zaibatsu were. Mitsubishi(*) was one of the biggest zaibatsu, and is now one of the biggest kieretsu. Judging the success of trying to break up the zaibatsu is left as an exercise to the reader ;-)

    (*) "Mitsubishi" means "three diamonds" in Japanese. Look at their logo... Now I'm blatantly karma whoring, huh

    --
    0 1 - just my two bits