Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fedora Will Get Full Mp3 Support, As IIS Fraunhofer Terminates Mp3 Licensing Program (fedoramagazine.org)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the adding-encoding dept.

An anonymous reader quotes Fedora Magazine: Both MP3 encoding and decoding will soon be officially supported in Fedora. Last November the patents covering MP3 decoding expired and Fedora Workstation enabled MP3 decoding via the mpg123 library and GStreamer... The MP3 codec and Open Source have had a troubled relationship over the past decade, especially within the United States. Historically, due to licensing issues Fedora has been unable to include MP3 decoding or encoding within the base distribution... A couple of weeks ago IIS Fraunhofer and Technicolor terminated their licensing program and just a few days ago Red Hat Legal provided the permission to ship MP3 encoding in Fedora.

15 of 133 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds good! by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Waiting until the patent expires requires patience, but Linux has outlived a LOT of patents, and as more expire, expect to see more currently-patented tech offered in the base distribution instead of having to hunt down a repository (such as Pacman) that has them in another part of the world where the patent is already expired oir is otherwise legally allowed to be distributed.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re: Sounds good! by prefec2 · · Score: 2

      You know these Patents only apply to the US and Japan. While I appreciate it, it was not an issue in Thema EU, China etc.

  2. Fraunhofer can stuff it by CrashNBrn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who cares about Fraunhofer's MP3? We've had LAME since 1998, and Ogg Vorbis since 2000. LAME's VBR (Variable Bit Rate) is better than even AAC, let alone Fraunhofer's crap licensing. And we can't forget FLAC and WavPack.

    1. Re: Fraunhofer can stuff it by vossman77 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The story is that they can now include LAME , because the patents have expired. Before Fedora had no mp3 support at all.

    2. Re:Fraunhofer can stuff it by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Who cares about Fraunhofer's MP3?

      Anybody who works with audio that is not 100% in his control from mic to distribution.

      As somebody who did some grad work with psychoacoustic modeling, everybody who was a little bit informed on the subject at the time knew that Fraunhofer's patents were BS, well-known stuff. I'm not sure why they weren't invalidated for prior art; it must have been a very narrow claim that MPEG just happened to standardize.

      They may have gotten some licensing revenue from this, but I, as well as many others on the open side of the industry, will never do business with them (ever) after the pain they've caused. Same goes for the patent regimes of the respective governments, since it takes two to tango with IP.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  3. Re: Linux? Bad choice. by darthsilun · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why was this voted -1? Very informative.

    Maybe because it's factually incorrect.

    GPL is the GNU Public License, not, as the OP claims, the GNU Protective License.

    Compiling with gcc does not infect your source. You might be required to release your source for other reasons, but not because you compiled it with gcc. Their lawyers are mistaken. And even if you wanted to be ultra conservative and believe the lawyers anyway, you can always compile with clang, or Intel's icc, or AMD's acc to get around that.

    Finally, the GPL doesn't require you to give source to everyone. You only have to give it to people who ask for it. Let's say you build a system for Dewey Cheatham and Howe. If they're the only ones who know about it, and they're the only ones who could ask for it. If you put your software your software on a web site for download only then would anyone know about it and be able to ask for the source

    No, IANAL. But I've been working with FOSS and the GPL for 25 years, so I know a little something about it. In the end though it's always what your own lawyer tells you that matters. So get a lawyer and pay for your legal advice.

  4. MP3 was good for the time. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    I see no need for anyone to add MP3 support to any Linux distro because while MP3 was good for the time, it's basically noisy garbage now that there has been significant competition and three orders of magnitude improvement on both storage capacity and network bandwidth. However, what this does mean is that any part of MP3 that was somehow better can now be incorporated into other codecs, so it's not a total loss... just 96kbps lossy. ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re: MP3 was good for the time. by jabuzz · · Score: 2

      Well indistinguishable from a CD would have to be Flac or Apple Lossless, which is considerably more than 320kbps.

      However last time I checked at 256kbps you will not be able to tell the difference between an MP3 encoded by LAME on maximum quality settings and an AAC, according to the blind listening tests.

      The quality of MP3's produced by LAME these days is markedly improved since the heyday of Napster. To be honest most people don't have the equipment to be able to tell the difference between a 320kbps MP3 and a Flac file. Not that the necessary equipment is that expensive either, however the vast majority of people don't feel the expense is worth it, or would rather waste their money on some Beats piece of junk.

  5. this seems bigger than Linux by thewolfkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    doesn't this affect all open source? Programs like Audacity can finally export MP3s natively without including "complex" and sometimes confusing instructions on how to download the MP3 codec

    --
    Just another second banana
  6. Re: Linux? Bad choice. by jgfenix · · Score: 2

    Also if you only use the code internally you don't have to distribute your changes. You only have to give away your changes if you let others to use your modified program.

  7. Amazon and Google Play by tepples · · Score: 2

    But in all seriousness, why would anyone bother with MP3 today.

    Car stereo with MP3 CD player and no 3.5 mm input. And the fact that two out of the three major recorded music download stores (Amazon and Google Play) deliver purchased recordings in MP3 format.

  8. Re: Linux? Bad choice. by teg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Finally, the GPL doesn't require you to give source to everyone. You only have to give it to people who ask for it.

    You don't have to give it to anyone who ask for it either. Only if they got the binaries from you, and thus are a licensee. The main benefit of that is that if you provide a GPL program (usually by modifying something that is already GPL) to a customer customized for their needs and include the source code, no-one else can require you to give them the source code. Thus, the changes can remain confidential. The customer does have the source code and can modify as much as she wants, however - or have someone else do it.

  9. An extra note by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 2

    In this day and age you need at least four more codecs to be supported to watch movies downloaded from torrents: AAC, AC3, DTS and AVC/H.264. And pirates have already started adopting HEVC/H.265.

  10. Re: So... by Type44Q · · Score: 2

    I believe the issue with DVDCSS relates to copyright (DMCA), not patents.

  11. AC3, MPEG-2 (Re:So...) by openright · · Score: 2

    AC3 patents expired on March 20, 2017
    For Mpeg2,

    OS news says 2018.
    http://mobile.osnews.com/story...

    But DVD's were sold in the US in 1995(1996 with CSS), so for patents after on mpeg2, DVD is prior art. So 2016 or 2018.