What are consequences of "merger necessitates removal of ...

[Thomas Dodd]

Mike A. Harris wrote:

> In other words, the GPL license on all MP3 software out there is
> invalid, regardless of wether or not Red Hat would have a license 
> to ship MP3 decoding technology.  Red Hat would have to either:
> 
> 1) Convince the patent owner to permit unlimited unrestricted use 
> 2) Pay the $50000 to license the patent, and then purchase or 
> 3) Pay the $50000 to license the patent, and hire developers to 

Missed a 4th possibility. One of the current players could relicense 
their player. Perhaps a new license, that looks like the GPL except the 
patent restriction. The negotiation for a license should allow for 
non-commercial use and redistribution. Also clarify that "selling" a 
collection of programs/source code is allowed, which is part of the 
current MP3 problems.

The player could even be dual licensed like Mozilla/OpenOffice.org, 
better still the MySQL way, so commercial code is possible, but such use 
would require a seperate license for MP3 (and friends). That would 
further help the patent holder guaranty revenue.

[Not that I agree with software patents at all. I personally don't 
create MP3 files. If a decent portable/car player with OGG-vorbis 
support shouw up I'll by one, but not until them. My only current use of 
MPEG is DVD/DVB, where their is really no alternative (yet).]

	-Thomas