Hi!
> > Some time ago Mark initiated a discussion about Lame's license. At the
> > moment Lame is fully GPL which involves some problems.
> > If Lame is compiled as a DLL then the LGPL applies.
> > If Lame is compiled as a standalone program then GPL applies.
> Why not run as standalone?
Because it makes integration into other packages more complicated and why
then develop a DLL version?
> > This way we could legalize Lame, i.e. every
> > Lame user could finally buy a legal Lame license!
> > This is rediculous I know because we would have to buy a license for a
> > program we developed ourselves but that how patends strike back ;(
> By doing this we just legitimize their patent complaints.
You cannot do anything against them. They already have them and ignoring it
will not improve the situation at all. Just in contrary Lame development
runs in danger of getting trouble with them and eventually will have to be
stopped if no licensing is possible at all.
CU
nils
--
Nils Faerber (Linux Nils) eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Student of computer science http://www.si.unix-ag.org/~nils/
Unix user group, University of Siegen, Germany
Siegen ... the arctic rain forest!
--
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
