LAME Legal Issues
- Bill 26Aug2017: Given that Steve feels strongly that this is a P1 (and thus a blocker), what do we write here? Here's what the LAME project has to say. They don't state outright that LAME does not infringe, instead they imply that all MP3 patents have expired. Apparently there could be MP3 patents held by other than Fraunhofer / Thompson / Technicolor.
- Steve 26Augy17: I think it is currently P1 because it is clearly inaccurate ("wrong"). I'm not sure that this page is entirely necessary, but if consensus is that we need a note in the manual about possible patent concerns, then I think we should certainly include FFmpeg (and rename this page). Debian's policy regarding patent issues may provide some guidance: https://wiki.debian.org/MultimediaCodecs#Legal_Issues
- Steve 26Augy17: ToDo-1 This page needs a rewrite in the light of: https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/en/ff/amm/prod/audiocodec/audiocodecs/mp3.html
- Gale 04May17: The "personal use" link below now redirects to https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/en/ff/amm/prod/audiocodec/audiocodecs/mp3.html#4 which seems to show that MP3 patent licensing is at an end. So this page must be changed even if Audacity does not ship LAME or build in an open version of it.
- Bill 06Aug2017: Following the link to that page, then following another link to https://http://www.audioblog.iis.fraunhofer.com/mp3-software-patents-licenses/ I find the following:
However, the end of the mp3 licensing program does not automatically mean that all mp3 technology is available license-free now. Apart from the core mp3 patents included in the licensing program, there might still be some implementation–specific patents (or patents for other functional enhancements) that have not expired. Thus, manufacturers will have to check the situation regarding their intended products first before including mp3.
Further down that page there is this exchange:
Anonymous
July 28, 2017 at 6:02 PM
I had a question: LAME is now completely legal and no longer a grey area? They use their own implementation of MP3 and the only patents they breached was the core MP3 patents, right?
Reply
red
August 1, 2017 at 8:14 AM
Hi,
Please understand that we cannot make any statement about the usage (or non-usage) of patents, for any mp3 software tool. Such questions have to be addressed by the tool developers themselves.
Kind regards, Romana from the Fraunhofer IIS Audio Blog team
If Audacity ships with LAME included we can probably get rid of this page, no?
LAME patent issues
While the LAME source code is free, the encoding technology that ready-compiled LAME binaries use is patented. The patents are held by Fraunhofer and administered by Thomson. Patenting raises a theoretical possibility that in some countries a user might need to pay a license fee to legally encode MP3s. This might vary according to the purpose of the encoding and whether the software being used is licensed.
There is no definitive list of countries where the patents unambiguously hold sway. However they are generally assumed to be enforceable in USA, Canada, the EEC and Japan. This means that in these countries (in theory), software that encodes MP3s must be licensed by the patent holders, and that anyone encoding MP3s with unlicensed encoders may also be infringing patents.
The best advice that can be given is that the user makes their own decision, based on their conscience, the country they are in, and taking into account the following:
- The patent holders have tended to enforce license fees against commercial rather than free MP3 encoders
- Thomson themselves have said that no license is needed by individuals creating music libraries of MP3 files for personal use (interpretations vary whether that sanctions using unlicensed encoders, free or otherwise)
- Existing MP3 patents will expire worldwide between 2010 and 2012 (but not until 2017 in the USA)
- The possibility remains at least in the USA that patents could be extended.
