On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 17:42, Ben Reser wrote: > On Thu, Aug 15, 2002 at 11:54:51AM +0100, Adam Williamson wrote: > > s/chicken/poor/ . Developing LAME is hardly a lucrative job =) > > LAME isn't vulnerable to an attack. Maybe some of their users are. > LAME only distributes source. And they claim they are for educational > purposes only. It's not illegal to distribute source to a patented > algorithm, because to get the patent they have to disclose the method > anyway and source is just a description of the algo. However a binary > is an implmentation of the algo and there would violate the patent.
Well...um...exactly. LAME are too poor to defend any patent action, therefore they can't distribute any binaries. I don't see any conflict between our posts. -- adamw
