New: Aud-X 1.2 - major improvements

[dimzon]

I am wondering which software lib are you using to DEcode the mp3 part?
AFAIK mp3 decoder from LAME ;)

[3dsnar]

yes, indeed,
as I mentioned, LAME is used for the main audio stream encoding,
while Aud-X is a separate thing used for encoding (and decoding) the spatial information
So the PCM stream, from decoded MP3 + the spatial info is used to generate the 5.1 sound.

[squid_80]

But doesn't LAME use libmad?

[Kurtnoise]

nope...mpglib.

[3dsnar]

Kurtnoise, did you have a chance
to prepare the latest BeLight installation?

[Gabriel_Bouvigne]

If you are using the mp3 decoder from Lame, then I've got some news for you:
Lame is using a GPL version of mpglib for decoding. I hope that you are aware of the implications.

edit: the good news is that a lot more software will then be able to use your processing ;-)

[3dsnar]

Yes. I hope that our web master will publish the lame
lib source that we use on our web site.
So everything will be cleared about this issue.
---------------------------------
On the other hand I am fighting for publishing also
the spatial coding part as open source. This might be possible I hope, but probably after the project gains some popularity.

[dimzon]

Yes. I hope that our web master will publish the lame
lib source that we use on our web site.
So everything will be cleared about this issue.

No!
Actualy (i'm not a GPL troll but...) it mean you must

Release you software (al least decoding part: filters etc) under GPL
Or obtain special permissions from GPL part author
Or use diferent mp3 decoding (not GPL-ed)


Don't get me wrong, I really respect your work at all (and I really impressed our interactions via e-mail :sly: )
But you must respect other intellectual property licenced under GPL


Sorry...

[3dsnar]

Yes, I understand.
We (my colleague in fact, 'cause I am only a DSP developer)
have to find out what are the legal issues related to using LAME.
e.g. if this is used as a separately compiled library,
still does it mean that the whole project has to be open source?
I know that there are several commercial applications, which use lame, and are not open source (they are not free either), but probably they are legal, so those issues must be solvable somehow.

I will ask him to take care of this, and also exactly what is Lame licence, i.e. Is Lame GPL or LGPL?
So he will have to clear this out, 'cause people often ask me about using LAME, etc. and frankly...I am not sure what to answer...

[dimzon]

AFIAK
LAME encoder is LGPL - it mean you can use it in commercial closed-source product
But decoder is GPL
e.g. if this is used as a separately compiled library,
still does it mean that the whole project has to be open source?
You can use LGPL part as you wish - (but if you perform modification of this part itself you must provide modified source code)
You can't use GPL as dynamic/static library at all. It means "Derivated work"
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/GNU_General_Public_License#GPL-related_disputes

[Kurtnoise]

Kurtnoise, did you have a chance
to prepare the latest BeLight installation?
Probably when the last bugs will be fixed...I hope this week or the next one.

[3dsnar]

AFIAK
LAME encoder is LGPL - it mean you can use it in commercial closed-source product
But decoder is GPL
e.g. if this is used as a separately compiled library,
still does it mean that the whole project has to be open source?
You can use LGPL part as you wish - (but if you perform modification of this part itself you must provide modified source code)
You can't use GPL as dynamic/static library at all. It means "Derivated work"
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/GNU_General_Public_License#GPL-related_disputes
OK, thanx for the information. I will study this.
If it will turned out that aud-x will become a serious project
(many people will use it), I guess the possibility of law suit will force the owners to comply with all the regulations. Actually it is even better, because I would preffer the project to become open source :) so I could share some scientific ideas with others... and now I am just responsible for talking to people about bug related issues, and other things that actually are not so exciting for me ;)

[3dsnar]

Probably when the last bugs will be fixed...I hope this week or the next one.
OK, please send it to me via email.
Thanx

[Gabriel_Bouvigne]

If it will turned out that aud-x will become a serious project
(many people will use it), I guess the possibility of law suit will force the owners to comply with all the regulations.
At this stage, the most likely to happen is just a very bad reputation.
Beware of it, it can be very damaging at early stages.
(good example: Sigma Designs mpeg4 video ripped from Xvid)

I think that you should act quickly regarding this issue.

[3dsnar]

OK. We have a limited man power, so the coding parts
take very loooong (therefore the bug fixes in our project do not occur to often). So probably releasing it as open source,
or changing to other mp3 decoder (which is not GPL) will not happen within days, or even weeks,
and I cannot do anything about this :(
The problem is that my colleagues are afraid that some big companies, like Thompson, or others
potentialy interested in mp3 5.1 will simply copy the ideas, modify it a bit and release it as some sort of new version of mp3surround. And at the end Aud-X is supposed to be a commercial undertaing (i.e. donationware. And, I guess they hope to licence it to some hardware manufactures at some stage).
But, since they want to keep it free for all free software applications, so some sort of limited open source licencing is something that they seek. But the legal issues have to be studied by someone who
is specialist in this matter...

[dimzon]

OK. We have a limited man power, so the coding parts
take very loooong (therefore the bug fixes in our project do not occur to often). So probably releasing it as open source,
or changing to other mp3 decoder (which is not GPL) will not happen within days, or even weeks,
and I cannot do anything about this :(
As temporaly solution - publish this licensing issues @ Aud-X site.
Just write @ main page and near download link: there are such licensing issues bla-bla-bla bla-bla-bla , we are working on it now, be patient please... Sorry.


It will help you to save Your reputation

The problem is that my colleagues are afraid that some big companies, like Thompson, or others
potentialy interested in mp3 5.1 will simply copy the ideas, modify it a bit and release it as some sort of new version of mp3surround. And at the end Aud-X is supposed to be a commercial undertaing (i.e. donationware. And, I guess they hope to licence it to some hardware manufactures at some stage).
You can release your code under dual licence sheme: (L)GPL/Commercial
So your project will be complete open for GPL developers
And you will be able to get money from commercial products ;)

[3dsnar]

OK, very valuable suggestion!
I will ask our web master to do that ASAP,
so probably it will be there next week.

[WeaponX]

Is your aud-x website down? Internet Explorer says "Cannot find server" and it will not load in Opera/Firefox also. Website also will not load yesterday.

[3dsnar]

Yes, it is down.
Sorry for all the difficulties.
It should work hopefully tomorrow,
or on Friday.
--
Please wait.
:thanks: