audio players....

[mailinglist at endosquid.com (Brendan)]

On Wednesday 01 February 2006 13:09, Don Levey wrote:
> discuss-bounces at blu.org wrote:
> > On Tuesday 31 January 2006 23:01, gboyce wrote:
> >> On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Brendan wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 31 January 2006 13:17, gboyce wrote:
> >>>> I believe the mp3 requirement is that if you sell an mp3 encoder or
> >>>> decoder, you must pay royalies.  There are no royalties for using
> >>>> one, so web site operators wouldn't need to pay.
> >>>
> >>> No. Just encoders. You also have to keep track of how many copies
> >>> are distributed and pay a few dollars on them.
> >>
> >> http://www.chillingeffects.org/patent/notice.cgi?NoticeID=464
> >>
> >> "From your publications and your web-site we learn that you
> >> distribute and/or sell decoders and/or encoders that use the MPEG
> >> Layer-3 standard.
> >>
> >> Our files do not show that you have a valid license agreement with
> >> us. This means that the products infringe the patent rights of
> >> Fraunhofer and THOMSON."
> >
> > Lovely. They've changed their agreement since they contacted a buddy
> > and me when we were writing an encoder. Always nice to see greediness.
> > _______________________________________________
>
> That letter was from 1998; when were you contacted?

Right before 9/11. A few lawyers wanted to hammer out a licensing deal for 
about 5 times as much as I was worth.