Mark Cason mcason at bigfoot.com
Sun Aug 12 07:15:53 PDT 2001

  No, AFAIK qt's licensing agreement does not
require a royalty fee.
  There is a US $2.50 - US $5.00 royalty fee that
has to be paid per unit for an encoder and US $.50
per unit for a decoder.  "If" Fraunhofer/Thomson
ever takes a hard stance on their license in the
open source community, things could get messy.  We
would in effect have to count all downloads of all
mp3 encoders/decoders that are distributed with
LFS and report them back the writers of the mp3
software so royalties could be tallied or risk
being sued.
  If being sued sounds ridiculous, all you have to
do is look at 2600.com.  They are being sued just
for posting a "link" to another web site.
  I'm really not a killjoy, I just don't like when
something as simple as a licensing agreement gets
in the way of doing things the way I want to do
  I will rejoice the day when I can get LFS
running on my system and get this $MS software off
of it.

-----Original Message-----
From: sklein at dravite.mint.net
[mailto:sklein at dravite.mint.net]On Behalf
Of Seth W. Klein
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2001 10:13 PM
To: blfs-book at linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: OUTLINE

Mark Cason wrote:
> <SNIP>
>                 --> SHOULD OGG VORBIS STUFF
>   Yes, <snip of why ogg is better than mp3>

Isn't that like saying that gtk should replace qt?
The answer
being, "No, of course not. The suitablility of a
package is up
to the admin, not BLFS."


Seth W. "sklein" Klein
sklein at mint.net
LFS FAQ Maintainer
   They live on the edge?  I live hanging from my
safty harness rope.

More information about the blfs-book mailing list