Micro$oft's WMP Not Licensed for MP3s


Mefiante (February 23, 2007, 13:37:26 PM):
Micro$oft loses MP3 patent case ...

... and its lawyers come off sounding like sore losers.

bluegray (February 25, 2007, 08:48:40 AM):
I must admit, I don't know all the finer details of the case, but I also understood that Fraunhofer owned mp3. How can Alcatel-Lucent now suddenly sue people for using mp3's if they paid license fees to Fraunhofer?
Mefiante (February 26, 2007, 08:07:43 AM):
It is true that Fraunhofer IIS owns the patents for MP3 technology, but the patent only covers the encoding principles, not the actual method of taking a specific digital audio signal (e.g. from an ordinary 44 kHz CD) and turning it into an MP3 encoded signal. The latter technology is where Lucent comes in.

An analogous patent is that for the RSA cryptosystem. The patent covers the mathematical principles, but not the method(s) of computation. A fast RSA implementation may involve Montgomery multiplication, which would be covered by a separate patent.

Mefiante (September 17, 2007, 19:37:26 PM):
Punchbag or villain? Micro$oft gets slapped yet again, this time by the EU's second highest court in M$'s appeal against the 2004 EU antitrust ruling in which M$ was ordered to pay almost $1 billion in fines. To add some sting to a smarting cheek, a class action lawsuit against M$ was filed in Arizona recently.



[0] Message Index

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page