[NTLUG:Discuss] Proprietary media morass

[Leroy Tennison]

Thank you, this is the kind of reply I was looking for (even though 
you're not a lawyer), I appreciate the response.

On 06/04/2016 05:36 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 12:00:19AM -0500, Leroy Tennison wrote:
>> Can anyone point me to an authoritative statement (or statements) about
>> playing proprietary media formats (WAV, MP3, etc) on Linux as long as the
>> content hasn't been pirated?  Is it legal or not?  The immediate context is
>> playing a voice mail message saved in WAV format.  My only concern is with
>> the legality of working with the format, not copyrighted content.
> While I generally don't consider Wikipedia to be "authoritative", it
> often has references to things that are more authoritative.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3#Licensing.2C_ownership_and_legislation
>
> For something like this there are two types of "legality" to consider:
> copyright and patent.  Because of the formats of both WAV and MP3 are
> well documented, widely known, and widely shared, I suspect there are
> no copyright restrictions involved for the formats themselves.  (Also,
> it's difficult to copyright a "format" -- previous attempts to do so
> have a long established history of failing.)
>
> That just leaves patents.  Since WAV typically contains uncompressed
> or raw audio, it's unlikely to be encumbered by any patent technologies.
>
> MP3 has been affected by various patents for compression, encoding,
> and decoding, but nearly all of the MP3-related patents have expired.
> The few that remain have highly questionable legal basis due to
> their timeline (i.e., prior art) and will expire at the end of 2017
> anyway.
>
> Summary:  I'd be very shocked if using either WAV or MP3 formats
> on their own pose any legal risks.  WAV is likely to be entirely
> riskless.
>
> Disclaimer:  I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.
>
> Pm
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>