All things related to multicast

["Richard Mavrogeanes" <>]

It's very simple, really.
 
"Open Source" does not mean "non-infringing".
 
All MPEG encoding and decoding technology is patented.  It is not possible to 
decode MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 without using an essential patent. Commercial 
products pay the necessary royalty, hence they can never be truly "free".
 
VLC does not pay the royalty...which is some $2.50 per decoder instance for 
MPEG-2 alone, and a different schedule for MPEG-4.  This is, by the way, why 
Microsoft does not include a MPEG-2 decoder.
 
Disclaimer:
Neither I nor my company holds any patents in this area, so I have no ax to 
grind.  My company sells a decoder, but frankly it's at a loss.  I would be 
far happier if the decoder royalty issue would just go away, or if there were 
a carve out in the license for educational, personal, or non-commercial use. 
But I doubt this will happen (as a board member of the MPEGIF and a former 
board member of ISMA, I can tell you "we tried").
 
<opinion>
The patent holders and the firm that represents them are too greedy and make 
it far too difficult for an institution to be legal.  A VLC user wishing to 
follow the rules is presented with an absurd agreement that only makes sense 
for vendors.
 
If a computer has a licensed decoder (e.g. a DVD player), then I would argue 
the royalty has been paid.  But VLC makes no distinction and therefore users 
risk infringement.
 
On the other hand, going 55 mph in a 50 mph zone is illegal, but I don't see 
too many people pulled over for this unless it's a police 'excuse' for 
something else (and that may be the real risk VLC users run).
</opinion>
 
 
 
Rich Mavrogeanes
Founder & Chief Streaming Officer
VBrick Systems, Inc.
12 Beaumont Road
Wallingford CT 06492 USA
+1 203.303.0200 office
+1 203.623-1698 mobile
http://www.vbrick.com <http://www.vbrick.com/> 
http://www.vbrick.net <http://www.vbrick.net/> 
Building Vision Across Your Network

________________________________

From: Frank Fulchiero 
[mailto:]
Sent: Mon 4/2/2007 10:08 PM
To: 
;
 
;
 

Subject: Legality of using VLC



One intriguing rumor I have heard from some folks is that there are 
people that think VLC is somehow "illegal" to use.
I have not heard this directly, but only indirectly, so don't know 
how true it is.

If anyone on these lists has a recent article from a knowledgeable 
source backing up this claim, I would appreciate it if they would 
post the link.
Also, if anyone has a good argument that VLC is illegal, or breaks 
any laws, please post your reasoning.

There seems to be a little bit of "almost-fud" regarding this issue, 
and I think a public discussion would help clear the air.

The OSX version of VLC has been hosted on the Apple servers for a 
while now, and is the 13th most popular download:

http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/

and there have been about 100 million downloads from the VLC site

http://www.videolan.org/stats/downloads.php

I doubt the above two facts would be true if there was something 
illegal about using or distributing VLC.

I know many of you belong to more than one list, so sorry for the 
cross-posting, but I'm trying to cover all interested parties, and I 
think this issue is important, as many of us are using VLC as clients.

Thanks,
Frank Fulchiero
Digital Media Specialist
Connecticut College