On 6 Okt, Artemis3 wrote:
LAME is LGPL'ed, not GPL'ed.
Ops, sorry, in http://www.mp3dev.org/mp3 says GPLed.. I
guess this creates confusion :) (most of my other comments
still apply anyway).
See lame-dir/LICENSE.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
0 and 1. Now what could be so hard
Margaret Clark wrote:
I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?),
LAME is not illegal. As others have pointed out, LAME is modified ISO code,
which was freely available at first, but later FHG began
Hi Alexander!
On Thu, 04 Oct 2001, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On 3 Okt, Brent Geery wrote:
I just want to clarify some facts.
there is nothing illegal about the whole LAME project. FhG put out
ISO sources as a guideline, which can be modified legally.
I'm not talking about the
Hi Ross!
On Fri, 05 Oct 2001, Ross Levis wrote:
jeremy brand wrote:
It is quite offensive when people on this list all guess my intentions for
writing such a patch. Nobody has got it right yet, even after I told this
list my intentions in some of the first few emails on this thread.
btw Margaret: you're the first woman I see here since ... ever? I'd
always imagined 'first contact' different :))
It really comes as no surprise to me that the first female poster here has
to be a moron. :)
Yes, I'm a sexist. 8)
-Youri
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 01:26:59 +0200, Roel VdB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MC I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
MC product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
MC bitching, because someone wants to remove the branding. I don't get
MC it.
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, the following spilled from the mind of Gabriel Bouvigne:
I will certainly sound harsh to you but I'd even suggest this extreme thing:
Adding a restriction to the Lame licence stating that it's forbidden to make
any change to libmp3lame that would prevent it from adding
Margaret Clark wrote:
I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
bitching, because someone wants to remove the branding. I don't get
it. Sounds like thieves complaining they got robbed.
AFAIK it is
- Original Message -
From: Margaret Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] clean frames in ancillary data with patch
I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
product (or did you
Hello Margaret,
MC I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
MC product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
MC bitching, because someone wants to remove the branding. I don't get
MC it. Sounds like thieves complaining they got robbed.
?? have
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, the following spilled from the mind of Rob Leslie:
jeremy brand wrote:
BTW, in case anyone is interested: this patch is permanatly located here:
http://hackor.com/misc/no_grafiti_frames_lame.diff
You might want to correct the spelling of graffiti.
Rob,
*haha*
Hello
I am not sure. I'll default to the lame experts on this. Actually, even
if my patch doesn't get it (which I guess it won't) could someone inform
me of the best _filler_. I figured it didn't matter, because if you can
put LAME x.xx (alpha) in there, then I figured anything could go in
jeremy brand wrote:
BTW, in case anyone is interested: this patch is permanatly located here:
http://hackor.com/misc/no_grafiti_frames_lame.diff
You might want to correct the spelling of graffiti.
--
Rob Leslie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list archive is at:
haha
j The idea behind this patch is to keep LAME from putting LAME
j name and versions into each frame of the mp3. I know that it
j is nice to have LAME information in frames for debugging and
j testing, but sometimes there is a want to have _clean_ (so to
j
Am Freitag, 28. September 2001 00:56 schrieben Sie:
haha
j The idea behind this patch is to keep LAME from putting LAME
j name and versions into each frame of the mp3. I know that it
j is nice to have LAME information in frames for debugging and
j testing, but
15 matches
Mail list logo
