They are legal, but they cost alot of money to get. For example, you have to pay an engineer to do studies to show that you meet the FCC requirements. They are also strict as what type of attenas can be used, and so forth. Usually the only people allowed the low power ratings are schools and community groups. The reason for the low power license is to make it less expensive that what the 50kW FM stations have to pay.
Gradstein contended that PlayMedia could be entitled to much more money if the court finds in its favor. MP3.com's business largely is based on MP3 downloads and thus has "required them to give their users the ability to download music in the MP3 format, which in turn has been reliant on Winamp," Gradstein said.
Last time I looked, Winamp wasn't the only free MP3 player that MP3.COM offered so I don't see how they can backup the claim that MP3.COM was reliant on Winamp. Plus I don't see how MP3.COM knew about any code being used from AMP before the lawsuit, thus I think any reasonable judge will throw out the case since they are a unknowing third party.
Nitrane(TM) is copyright protected and is the property of Nullsoft, Inc. This software may be used freely only with Winamp(TM), and may not be copied, sold, distributed or used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of Nullsoft, Inc.
The prior was taken from the README.TXT from version 2.10. Nitrane is under a separate copyright from Winamp. Winamp is just a shell to different modules. It would be easy to write a plugin for Winamp that uses XAudio instead of FFH or Nitrane. Nitrane on the other hand is provided free, though it must be used with Winamp. I'm no legal scholar, so I don't know if the AMP license would allow for this resriction, but Nitrane has always been distributed for free and Nullsoft has never collected any money for Nitrane.
I think PlayMedia is just looking to make money. By going after distributors, even though it will never hold, they are just wasting everybody's time and showing how incredibly stupid and selfish they are. Winamp is the best mp3 player. Peter Gogas
Slashdot Mirror
They are legal, but they cost alot of money to get. For example, you have to pay an engineer to do studies to show that you meet the FCC requirements. They are also strict as what type of attenas can be used, and so forth. Usually the only people allowed the low power ratings are schools and community groups. The reason for the low power license is to make it less expensive that what the 50kW FM stations have to pay.
Peter Gogas
KB1BGL
Last time I looked, Winamp wasn't the only free MP3 player that MP3.COM offered so I don't see how they can backup the claim that MP3.COM was reliant on Winamp. Plus I don't see how MP3.COM knew about any code being used from AMP before the lawsuit, thus I think any reasonable judge will throw out the case since they are a unknowing third party.
Nitrane(TM) is copyright protected and is the property of Nullsoft, Inc. This software may be used freely only with Winamp(TM), and may not be copied, sold, distributed or used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of Nullsoft, Inc.
The prior was taken from the README.TXT from version 2.10. Nitrane is under a separate copyright from Winamp. Winamp is just a shell to different modules. It would be easy to write a plugin for Winamp that uses XAudio instead of FFH or Nitrane. Nitrane on the other hand is provided free, though it must be used with Winamp. I'm no legal scholar, so I don't know if the AMP license would allow for this resriction, but Nitrane has always been distributed for free and Nullsoft has never collected any money for Nitrane.
I think PlayMedia is just looking to make money. By going after distributors, even though it will never hold, they are just wasting everybody's time and showing how incredibly stupid and selfish they are. Winamp is the best mp3 player. Peter Gogas