I have copied the Executive Contact and the Legal Counsel for Xiph.org on this message. Please drop them on follow-ups that are not relevant to Ogg/Vorbis. Mr. Rosedale and Mr. Moffitt: the topic of MP3 patents arose on debian-legal (thread at http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/07/msg00081.html ) and we could all use some competent advice.
On 15 Jul 2005 09:05:10 GMT, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > > If I were defending, say, an Ogg/Vorbis implementation [...] I > > would argue that a wavelet transform is sufficiently different [...] > > Wavelet transforms are not the only thing the format supports, but it > may be usable to defend a particular encoder. Do you happen to know whether the Xiph.org team has retained competent counsel to evaluate the possible impact of the Fraunhofer and Sisvel patent suites on Ogg/Vorbis? (They claim that Ogg/Vorbis is "patent-and-royalty-free" at http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/ , which is pretty strong language.) If not, maybe Fluendo would fund the legal fees -- they seem willing to pay money to random lawyers for (IMHO, IANAL) dubious opinions and to post the result publicly (Google: gstreamer Moglen). Personally, I would be little more inclined to rely on the continued availability of royalty-free open-source Ogg/Vorbis encoders than their MP3 equivalents without some indication that someone competent is on record as to the basis for a reasonable belief that they do not infringe the Fraunhofer suite. Cheers, - Michael (IANAL, TINLA)
