On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 10:53:26AM +0100, Esteban Manchado Velázquez wrote: > Hmmmm.... just read at Slashdot that Thomson and Fraunhofer have changed their > minds and now want to charge for mp3 decoders, too (?). > > http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/software.html
www.mp3licensing.com lists a number of patents on the site, of which one (US patent 4,942,607) is highly applicable to the mp3 method, and a few others are partially applicable. US patent 4,942,607 makes a number of claims about a process that takes digital sound input, converts it to a frequency domain signal, and removes/ignores certain components based on a psycho-acoustic model. It does have any claims about taking that data and reconstructing the audio signal. It is pretty clear from reading the claims that decoders do not fall under the patent. I have only cursorily reviewed the other patents, to the extent of finding them less relevant than 4,942,607. I reserve the right to be wrong, and there may be other relevant patents, both US and elsewhere. It is my belief that, based on the patents listed in the portfolio, and apart from other considerations, Thomson/Fraunhofer do not have any basis for requiring licensing fees for mp3 decoders. *However*, there are other considerations. If you distribute an mp3 encoder, you probably need to license the 4,942,607 patent. For that privilege, Thomson/Fraunhofer can set whatever terms they want, including, but not limited to, sleeping with your wife, riding your motorcycle, or demanding $0.75 for each _decoder_ you distribute. It is my opinion that this is the approach that they are taking with the above listed web page. Removing mp3 decoders is unwarranted, IMO. dave...
