Re: very rough pre-gep tentative new modules list

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

On Wed, Sep 18, 2002 at 10:44:12PM -0400, Dan M. wrote:
> I know this is probably a bit off topic,

Yep.

> but what about a program that can 
> convert an mp3 to another format like ogg?  And another app for proprietary 
> video? Could those be included in the Gnome dist.?

Converting from mp3 to ogg results in a terrible final product. Re-encoding
from original is the way to go here, otherwise you get really noticable
artifacts (and I know you can't always do that, but pushing software _designed_
to give crappy results sounds like a bad idea).

I don't know if Frauenhofer would view this as decoding in countries
where they have an applicable patent or not.

> Or would the conversion program step on toes even if it doesn't 
> interactively display the original file contents in its proprietary state?
> 
> If I write software that can do translation, like Wine, that could 
> "interpret" an mp3, even though I have never seen the code used to produce 
> the mp3, am I breaking the law in the US or EU?
> 
> I guess I am naive...I don't understand how something as broad as an idea 
> can be protected...maybe an implementation, but an idea?  Wouldn't a car 
> engine be similar?  They all run off the same idea, but they use a different 
> implementation.  It seems like Compaq would have done exactly the same thing 
> I am talking about when they hired engineers to work at making a compatible 
> IBM BIOS; was that legal?

Simplest answer: Common sense unfortunately left the field of national
lawmaking a long time ago in oh so many countries.

Many of your examples above are talking about the difference between
patent protection and trade secret protection. You can't use
reverse-engineering to defeat patent protection anywhere that I know
about.

But this is far too off-topic for this list, so I'm stopping now.

Malcolm