[Fedora-legal-list] clarification: is "inactive" mp3 source code forbidden?

[Tristan Santore]

On 01/10/12 21:18, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 03:40:57PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> See: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/214
>>
>> I'm just looking for a quick clarification on whether it's our position that
>> mp3 falls under patented code we should avoid packaging even as source.
> 
> (Double-clarification: not packaging the source into a binary RPM. Just
> leaving the source, not built into the binary, as part of a source RPM.)
> 
> 
Again, I believe this is contributory infringement. Fedora cannot do
this. We cannot distribute compiled or not compiled packages with the
contents.

In fact, Tom has already clarified.

On 04/28/2012 10:40 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > What is the current situation with MP3 allowance in Fedora? I thought
> > 2012 was the year when we could -at least- have not-patent-encumbered,
> > free MP3 _decoding_. Can you please update us on the latest status?
We'll revisit decoding in late 2015, barring sanity in US patent law
spontaneously appearing (or the Mayan apocalypse rendering the issue
irrelevant).

~tom

I believe the sanity issue is, when a patent was filed or when it was
granted. Never mind the other patents surrounding the core patent.
Sanity is hard to achieve ;-p

Regards,

Tristan

-- 
Tristan Santore BSc MBCS
TS4523-RIPE
Network and Infrastructure Operations
InterNexusConnect
Mobile +44-78-55069812
Tristan.Santore at internexusconnect.net

Former Thawte Notary
(Please note: Thawte has closed its WoT programme down,
and I am therefore no longer able to accredit trust)

For Fedora related issues, please email me at:
TSantore at fedoraproject.org