On 08/28/2011 10:51 PM, curriegrad2004 wrote:
Steve,
Do you have any proof to back this up? Because if not it just sounds like a bunch of FUD to me. In what way is this FUD? Voice Age do not claim to represent everyone with a patent relevant to the codes they have pools for. From experience we know more about the handling of the G.729 codec. Voice Age says they represent most of the relevant patent holders. They point you to a couple of the others, which they don't represent. If you use more than the basic features of G.729 you will find lawyers letters arriving about patents Voice Age didn't mention. On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Steve Underwood<steveu@coppice.org> wrote:
On 08/28/2011 05:09 AM, Moises Silva wrote:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:07 AM, Michal Kopacki<mkopacki@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2011-08-24 03:30, Steve Underwood wrote:
As far as I know, you can't even licence AMR properly from Voice Age. I understand their patent pool is far from complete. Even their G.729 pool licencing, which is far more mature, can leave you getting unexpected letters from lawyers.
Steve In that case how one can do proper licensing ? I didn't found any other company selling AMR Licenses.
Did you try calling Voice Age? you should discuss this with them. Be warned. Voice Age may not properly inform you about patents outside their pool. This is understandable, if you think about it. To do so would be expressing an opinion about a possibly touchy legal issue.
Steve
Steve