] On Behalf Of Chris Bagnall
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 4:28 PM
To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] G729 Licensing Revisited - I'm Sorry!
On 28/2/14 9:04 pm, Jayson Devor wrote:
> That being said, will purchasing 23 licenses (one for each channel
>
On 28/2/14 9:04 pm, Jayson Devor wrote:
That being said, will purchasing 23 licenses (one for
each channel that we use), and continue to use the open source g729
sorftware keep us legal?
I know at least half a dozen people who do this so that they can more
effectively balance their licence com
04 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] G729 Licensing Revisited - I'm Sorry!
> Correct, I didn't mention this, since I was assuming OP was talking
> about getting it into production. Should have been more clear.
>
Sorry I
cussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] G729 Licensing Revisited - I'm Sorry!
On 2/28/14, Johann Steinwendtner wrote:
> On 2014-02-28 14:04, Tahir Almas wrote:
>> 1) We do not perform any transcoding whatsoever. All recordings, and
>> voice mail are in G729,
>>
> Correct, I didn't mention this, since I was assuming OP was talking
> about getting it into production. Should have been more clear.
>
Sorry I should clarify. We were incubated for the testing period
however now will be depolying
for commercial use. That being said, we do feel the need to
contr
On 2/28/14, Johann Steinwendtner wrote:
> On 2014-02-28 14:04, Tahir Almas wrote:
>> 1) We do not perform any transcoding whatsoever. All recordings, and
>> voice mail are in G729,
>> and allow=g729 for all peers and in sip.conf. Is there anything else
>> we need to perform "g729 p
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:55 PM, Darryl Moore wrote:
>
> On Feb 27, 2014 10:02 PM, "Paul Belanger"
> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> No such thing as 'free open source g729 license', if you actually read the
>> site:
>>
>
> There is regarding the copyright on the code. The fact it is also patent
> encumbered
On Friday 28 Feb 2014, Tahir Almas wrote:
> As earlier referred following quote from their site
>
> "DISCLAIMER: You might have to pay royalty fees to the G.729/723.1
> patent holders for using their algorithm"
>
> You have to pay royalty fee for using their algorithm and it does not
> matter wh
On 2014-02-28 14:04, Tahir Almas wrote:
1) We do not perform any transcoding whatsoever. All recordings, and
voice mail are in G729,
and allow=g729 for all peers and in sip.conf. Is there anything else
we need to perform "g729 passthrough". More importantly are we still
liable
>
> 1) We do not perform any transcoding whatsoever. All recordings, and
> voice mail are in G729,
> and allow=g729 for all peers and in sip.conf. Is there anything else
> we need to perform "g729 passthrough". More importantly are we still
> liable? Given that most vendors support G729, why do som
Hello Everyone,
Thank your for your response. There are two critical questions I would
like clarified
kindly:
1) We do not perform any transcoding whatsoever. All recordings, and
voice mail are in G729,
and allow=g729 for all peers and in sip.conf. Is there anything else
we need to perform "g729
On Feb 27, 2014 10:02 PM, "Paul Belanger"
wrote:
>
> >
> No such thing as 'free open source g729 license', if you actually read
the site:
>
There is regarding the copyright on the code. The fact it is also patent
encumbered is a different issue.
> DISCLAIMER: You might have to pay royalty fees t
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Jayson Devor wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> We are looking to transition our 23 channels from testing/lab into
> production. During testing we used the free open source g729 license
> using the instructions found here:
>
> http://blog.manhag.org/2010/05/installing-th
Hello Everyone,
We are looking to transition our 23 channels from testing/lab into
production. During testing we used the free open source g729 license
using the instructions found here:
http://blog.manhag.org/2010/05/installing-the-free-g729-codec-for-asterisk/
A little more about our setup. Al
14 matches
Mail list logo
