Full MP3 Support Being Added To Fedora Linux

[oiaohm]

Um, Mp3 was published in 1993. The most important concepts like VBR, joint stereo were already known 20 years ago. So, you're saying that there's still some patented mp3 tech left, but distros don't seem to care about lawsuits and the mp3 inventors don't sell licenses anymore, huh? I really much doubt there's anything patentable left unless you refer to some 3rd party who might have introduced new psychoacoustic models or something similar after May 1997. But that's probably closed source and won't affect us in any way.

There are some psychoacoustic models still patented that are used by different Mp3 encoders.

I also missed one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3_Surround 5.1 in mp3 is 2004 so the very last mp3 patents is 2024-25 at the last. But those files play with 2 channel playback. There is a different model in the Mp3 Surround changes that could be used for encoding a 2 channel as well.

Mp3 is most likely free enough other than people with Surround and Surround Mp3 are not going to notice the difference. There comes a point when for 90+ percent of the population the remaining patents don't matter. So Distribution should be able to ship with reasonable play back support of Mp3 now.

[KrallDennis]

MP4/AAC support right out of the box would have been nice.

[caligula]

There are some psychoacoustic models still patented that are used by different Mp3 encoders.

I also missed one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3_Surround 5.1 in mp3 is 2004 so the very last mp3 patents is 2024-25 at the last. But those files play with 2 channel playback. There is a different model in the Mp3 Surround changes that could be used for encoding a 2 channel as well.

Mp3 is most likely free enough other than people with Surround and Surround Mp3 are not going to notice the difference. There comes a point when for 90+ percent of the population the remaining patents don't matter. So Distribution should be able to ship with reasonable play back support of Mp3 now.

It sounds like none of the code in common open source implementations (included by distributions) infringes on these.

[oiaohm]

It sounds like none of the code in common open source implementations (included by distributions) infringes on these.

Correct they don't ffmpeg and most open source mp3 implementations stop at 2 channel. So we have 90% of what Mp3 is and that is most likely good enough.

a52 that is used a lot has also gone end of patent. AAC I don't know where the good enough point in it is as it starts expiring core patents this year and next.

I really do suspect by the time 5.1 channel MP3 audio is out of patent we will not even want to use it due to other patent clear options like opus being better and having existing market share.

[caligula]

Correct they don't ffmpeg and most open source mp3 implementations stop at 2 channel. So we have 90% of what Mp3 is and that is most likely good enough.

a52 that is used a lot has also gone end of patent. AAC I don't know where the good enough point in it is as it starts expiring core patents this year and next.

I really do suspect by the time 5.1 channel MP3 audio is out of patent we will not even want to use it due to other patent clear options like opus being better and having existing market share.

Ok then. I've never heard anyone selling 5.1 content anywhere. Seems like a very niche product. As it is backwards compatible, it's less of a problem for Linux users. The situation with mp3 was quite bad. Distros not shipping any decoders and recommending commercial licenses - as a result people didn't get any audio playback in some cases. 2.0 playback of 5.1 content is bearable. That's something the Linux gamers are familiar with when the games didn't support multichannel (e.g. EAX) directly or via Wine back in the day.

[andreano]

there are so many audiofools who talk utter crap. Yeah right vinyl is better than digital and FLAC is sooooo much better than 320kbps MP3. Vinyl is a shit medium for many technical reasons and I challenge anyone to a blind FLAC/MP3 hearing booth test run by me using properly encoded MP3s.

Let's not forget the biggest MP3 artifact: I don't know if your definition of "properly encoded" covers this, but if your listening test is a mixalbum, and you don't add the gapless metadata (which for MP3 is nonstandard), it doesn't exactly take golden ears to tell them apart, no matter the bitrate!

The reason I like vinyl (a crappy medium indeed) is just the mastering — the loudness war does not apply in the same way.

It's the silliest reasons that actually matter to people, isn't it?

[andreano]

voting with your wallet

That makes sense in a competitive market, but a settled format war is not that. Format war basically works like this:

ẋ = x

…positive feedback!

If I'm buying a codec just because I have to, to be compatible with everyone else, despite better options, then I'm forced to reward someone I dislike. That's not voting with my wallet. More the opposite!

That's why patents in standards is such a cruel thing; I have little against patents in general.

[sdack]

That makes sense in a competitive market, but a settled format war is not that. Format war basically works like this:

ẋ = x

…positive feedback!

If I'm buying a codec just because I have to, to be compatible with everyone else, despite better options, then I'm forced to reward someone I dislike. That's not voting with my wallet. More the opposite!

That's why patents in standards is such a cruel thing; I have little against patents in general.

It certainly was and still is a competitive market with audio formats competing with each other. MP3 also wasn't settled. It was new. Also research needs to funded or nothing will be researched. Manufactures then only pass the cost onto the consumer. The consumer then decides with the wallet if they want it or not. If you then like a song, but not it's price, then that's your personal problem. Or as they say, don't ask why something costs as much as it does, ask why you don't have enough money.

[andreano]

It certainly was and still is a competitive market with audio formats competing with each other. MP3 also wasn't settled. It was new.

We agree about what it was, not what it is. If we're still using MP3, despite strictly better options, then I call that an entrenched format, not a competitive market — MP3 won't go away, and that's NOT because anyone likes it anymore.

Research needs to be funded or nothing will be researched.

Funding != patent licensing: You can have other motives. There are royalty-free formats after all. Just look at the Alliance for open media. ←Here is someone willing to do it for free, and in such a case, it seems a crime to me to let the world lock itself into a non-free format (even democratically by people voting with their wallets), because the network effect is cruel, and capitalistic principles make no attempt to counteract that.

[sdack]

We agree about what it was, not what it is. If we're still using MP3, despite strictly better options, then I call that an entrenched format, not a competitive market — MP3 won't go away, and that's NOT because anyone likes it anymore.


Funding != patent licensing: You can have other motives. There are royalty-free formats after all. Just look at the Alliance for open media. ←Here is someone willing to do it for free, and in such a case, it seems a crime to me to let the world lock itself into a non-free format (even democratically by people voting with their wallets), because the network effect is cruel, and capitalistic principles make no attempt to counteract that.

I was referring to the markets, which still are competitive. And if you like it or not, patents are a way to fund research. I then don't care for why you dislike them.