Michael, Felipe, thanks for your responses. This was very useful info.
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Felipe Contreras
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Michael Smith <msmith@...> wrote:
> > Ultimately, anyone answering this with anything other than "consult
> > your attorney" is... being misleading, probably.
> > However, in addition to that, I'll explain a bit:
> > mp3parse: This is in -ugly because it's related to mp3, which has
> > known patent issues. I expect a qualified patent attorney would be
> > able to tell you that it's actually fine.
> > asfdemux: Microsoft claims patents on aspects of the ASF format. I
> > have no idea if asfdemux infringes any of them; of the four plugins
> > you mention this is by far the most likely to be problematic.
> > aacparse, amrparse: like mp3parse, these relate to processing formats
> > that have known patent issues. Again I'd expect that a detailed
> > analysis by a patent attorney would most likely end up telling you
> > that these are fine from that perspective.
> However, it's quite likely that you are going to use these with some
> decoders, for which you will pay the respective license for
> distribution. So, whatever patent the parsers "infringe", should be
> covered by the decoders' license.
> Felipe Contreras