Java Media Framework Drops MP3 186
realinvalidname writes "Sun had stopped downloads of its Java Media Framework about a week ago due to an undisclosed 'licensing issue.' Now we know what it is, as they've removed MP3 encoding and decoding from the JMF that's downloadable now. Of course, this isn't surprising given recent news about
new MP3 licensing terms."
not the reason?? (Score:5, Informative)
"Thomson has never charged a per unit royalty for freely distributed software decoders. For commercially sold decoders - primarily hardware mp3 players - the per-unit royalty has always been in place since the beginning of the program," a spokesman said"
"A Thomson spokesman told NewsForge's Robin Miller that it was a ruse by Ogg Vorbis advocates to get publicity.® "
http://www.theregus.com/content/4/26153.html
Javalayer MP3 Player (Score:5, Informative)
Re:not the reason?? (Score:3, Informative)
Disclaimer: I am not a Java dev...
That aside, there is a project to develop a Vorbis Java SPI [javazoom.net], which (from the impression I get) makes Java decoding of vorbis easy, and fits a standard interface. Or something.
gnoshi
Re: Java Bug 4499904 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OV..does anyone know? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:If not mp3... (Score:4, Informative)
Expect to see lots of codec's for JMF provided by third parties, the way it should be. Should be because SUN's programmers don't have the time nor inclination (nor obligation) to learn every little detail about every little file format. It'll be better in the end to have a more dedicated support for each codec whilst keeping the portability and API static for all codecs.
Mod Parent Up! (Score:3, Informative)
From the Register article:
A Thomson spokesman told NewsForge's Robin Miller that it was a ruse by Ogg Vorbis advocates to get publicity.®
Hmmph.
Re:not the reason?? (Score:3, Informative)
What they're basically saying is, "Don't make any mp3's but it's okay if you play them."
Tarkin? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:not the reason?? (Score:5, Informative)
You're getting your information from a PR person. I'm getting mine from the licensing page [mp3licensing.com]. I see no such exception for free decoders.
the licencing terms have changed again (Score:3, Informative)
Re:the licencing terms have changed again (Score:1, Informative)
I can think of another company that claimed that they would do one thing, but changed their mind when it suited them since their license stated otherwise.
Re:not the reason?? (Score:2, Informative)
For example, Sun could be sued in 5 years time and have to make a retrospective licence payment. Thompson are making sure they keep a few cards up their sleeve.
The PR stunt in saying nothing has change is true for today, but not necessarily tomorrow.
No, Don't mod parent up (Score:5, Informative)
Basically Thompson have said they currently don't plan to sue anyone making a software decoder but they don't grant you the right to use their patent either. Nobody selling or planning on selling software can use their patent without risk of infringement (and compensation pays triple if you knowingly infringe a patent) and being sued by Thompson in the future.
What some PR flack said doesn't change that. It's only what's in the licence that counts.
Next time when you are clearing posting to spread misinformation and crap, try posting as you so you can get modded down for it.Re:not the reason?? (Score:3, Informative)
The page you linked to states explicitly that MP3 decoders are not necessarily subject to per-unit royalties: either pay a per-unit fee ($0.75) or a one-time royalty of $50 000. Pay the latter, and you're covered for any number of decoders shipped. For any software company (Nullsoft/Winamp, Apple, whoever) this is small change - less than the cost of one man-year of coding.
Granted, this is an issue if you're trying to run a non-commercial project on the cheap, and a big issue if you want to distribute free encoder software (no flat-rate option there - $2.50 per unit), but this shouldn't rip the MP3 players out of RedHat or Mandrake's distros any time soon. I imagine it's the encoder issue which caused this move?
Read the Article - Follow the Link! (Score:3, Informative)
Really now? You might want to take a look at the link [mp3licensing.com] provided in that very same article you lifted the "publicity" quote. The licensing specifically lists prices for "PC Software Applications" as well as "Hardware Products".
From the xmms web site..... (Score:4, Informative)
So why the hell is everybody freaking out? I agree, just like GIFs, the MP3 format is encumbered by patents, and it's probably a good idea to start transitioning to a format that doesn't have this problem. However, the sky hasn't fallen yet.
-J
Get the old one here (Score:2, Informative)
1 [uni-paderborn.de]
2 [tu-darmstadt.de]