similar to: Are mp3 royalties inherited by ogg?

> >So uh, you think it's worth more for mp3, than the actual music > >involved? > > > >Come on. > > Hmm.. so what you're saying is that for under $2K I can get an unlimited > distribution license from the recording industry? To burn, distribute, > sell and market as much of their material as I like? Wow. Sign me up. Streaming music is $250

> I agree with that much of it, but that doesn't seem to me like such a "bad" > deal. I applaud the vorbis effort, don't get me wrong, but I don't think > it's evil for Frauhofer/IIS to charge people who want to use their > technology if they're using it for profit. It may be ugly and unsavory, > but it's nothing to get terribly upset over. I

At 14:45 6/9/2001 -0600, you wrote: >Streaming music is $250 minimum, with, I believe, less than 2% >royalties. For $500 a year you can stream all the music in the world >pretty much, prefectly legally. If you make a profit, it's a royalty. >But MP3's royalty here is higher than the royalty for the actual music. >That is out of whack. Especially in an age where we are

> performances. That's ~125,000 performances a year, which equates to about > $180,000. > > Significantly higher than the Frauhofer license, unless you generate > $9Mil/yr or more in revenue from your stream. The rates are in arbitration, and I doubt they will come out anywhere near that amount. It just isn't feasible, even for large companies. Reember, tradidional

Hi everybody, As the Asterisk community is getting larger and larger, I was wondering that the features which are provided in Asterisk and are programmed by the open source community under GPL, or GUIs like FreePBX which also come loaded with wonderful features and uses same Asterisk, are they anywhere violating any patent laws? Most of the features work the same way as Nortel, Avaya and other

Patenting a mathematical formula is NOT creating a machine nor is it unique. For example. 2+2=4... apples + apples^2= given outcome. I want to patent this. It's stupid to patent something like that. The same is true for formula algorithms. Algorithms occur in nature. Thus should not be patented. Now, Volley G Mathison inventor of the Electropsychometer had a machine that he could patent. A

Hello. Can Opus provide better quality than MP3 320kbps? Can Russian resident use opus for encoding music file without any limitations from any countries laws and patents, so .opus file can be loaded directly on any website and get revenue from it without any royalties or licenses? Thanks Konstantin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

At 13:52 6/9/2001 -0600, you wrote: >So uh, you think it's worth more for mp3, than the actual music >involved? > >Come on. Hmm.. so what you're saying is that for under $2K I can get an unlimited distribution license from the recording industry? To burn, distribute, sell and market as much of their material as I like? Wow. Sign me up. >You think it would be nice if

Fraunhofer and Thomson Multimedia release their new mp3pro codec and new licenseconditions for streaming mp3 : http://www.techreview.com/web/kiang/kiang060701.asp My comment is that the licensecharge isnt frighting compared to what we broadcaster pays in musicroyalties allready. Is this what you feared jack? :) -- Venlig hilsen/Kind regards Thomas Kirk ARKENA thomas@arkena.com

I guess you've all read it already, but here it goes: "All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other ?open source? codecs now. Unfortunately, just because something is open source, it doesn?t mean or guarantee that it doesn?t infringe on others patents. An open standard is different from being royalty free or open source. Sent

Everyone involved in the Vorbis project should get their A into G and get streaming worked out before the 1st of Jan, so that when Fruanhofer start cracking down on streaming MP3, there's a good, workable alternative to switch to :) This includes the plugins and such --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe

Hi I have created a small website trying to document my Ogg/Vorbis support for MPEG4IP. You can find it here. http://www.maersk-moller.net/mpeg4ip/index.html Kind regards Peter Maersk-Moller --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request@xiph.org' containing

At 16:30 6/9/2001 -0600, you wrote: >broadcasting online. Nor are they subject to the compulsory license. Right.. it would be nice to see online broadcasters treated the same way. >There's still a possibility that the DMCA will be dismantled before the >arbitration is even finished. You shouldn't have to pay the RIAA >anyway, and the fact that they are even involved is

Hi. Is it possible (legally) to stream MP3s on Icecast that have been encoded with LAME encoder (http://lame.sourceforge.net/license.txt)? So if a composer writes a track, then saves in MP3 with LAME, and wants to distribute with Icecast server, is it legal? Must he get license for MP3 (http://mp3licensing.com/royalty/emd.html) and pay any royalties for MP3 DISTRIBUTING or STREAMING as it stated

It's really pretty simple. You can download the code and build it all you want... ...for yourself. It cannot be distributed, sold, or used commercially in any way. That's all. /g. -----Original Message----- From: Icecast [mailto:icecast-bounces at xiph.org] On Behalf Of Robert Jeffares Sent: Tuesday, 16 May, 2017 17:03 To: icecast at xiph.org Subject: Re: [Icecast] Frauenhofer signing

This document from Qualcomm may help. http://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/qualcomm-dash-licensing-commitment it states : Companies will not have to pay royalties or license fees because they have implemented the DASH Standard using Qualcomm's DASH Essential Patents within a standalone software application sold and distributed separately from a product capable of implementing a WWAN

> I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not charging anything. As > mentioned, the royalties to record labels still stand if you don't follow > the rules, but this will be true regardless of the format > (mp3/vorbis/whatever.) Do you have any ads on your site? That's probably streaming related revenue. Do you list on shoutcast.com? There's definately

The H.264 codec patent by Qualcomm has been ruled invalid by a San Diego Federal jury: http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197001066 . That means that H.264 codecs can now be written, distributed and revised freely under any license their authors choose, including GPL, public domain, or any other, and $free now that royalties are no longer required. How does H.264

On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:52:38PM +0200, Jack Moffitt wrote: > > Does it matter if the stream is mp3 or ogg? > > No. It could be WAV, FLAC, or some 2-bit per sample mono format where > the music is unrecognizable. You'd still have to pay the royalties. It DOES matter if it's mp3. You have to pay the publisher royalties regardless, but in addition, there's a 2%

Basically, to legally broadcast music you must: A) Obtain permissions from the copyright holder (usually the publisher, record label) of the *composition*. ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC offer compulsory licenses for all of the artists they represent, fees based upon roughly how many listeners your station has & how many songs in your broadcast are by artists/composers they represent. B) Obtain