Wow you need a license to run your SR deck for commercial use!! That's really amazing. I don't know of anyone who has actually done that but is it possible that part of the purchase price goes to that license fee. If it's in the manual it would not seem to be the case. Is there anyone on the list that has done this for an SR machine? This seems to demonstrate that the letter of the law is surely not common practice when it comes to mpeg-4. How could anyone assume an SR deck is not being used for commercial use? How can Sony sell the machine without including the necessary license fee in the cost?
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Robert Ferguson <robertf@...> wrote:
>
> You don't need to license MPEG Streamclip. You need to license MPEG-4 for commercial use. Same as with ANY use of MPEG-4.
>
> This includes Sony HDCAM-SR decks which are only licensed for "personal and non-commercial use" and "No license is granted... for any other use... including... commercial use." Page 177 of the SR manual elaborates and directs customers to MPEG LA for a license.
>
> The Apple Quicktime MPEG component is for MPEG-2.
>
> Everyone creating MPEG-4 needs a license. Very few actually obtain one.
>
> Robert
>
>
> On Nov 7, 2011, at 11:55 AM, johnrobmoore wrote:
>
> > Has your IT manager provided you with a "legal" alternative to fill your needs? I would think it is his/her job to provide what you need to do your job properly and efficiently. Why doesn't he/she do the necessary research? It's frustrating when people focus only on the problem and not the solution it just makes it harder for everyone.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Steve Pankow <spankow@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I've had no luck contacting the author of MPEG Streamclip regarding MPEG
> > > licensing, and our IT manager continues to beat me over the head regarding
> > > this. A snip from the latest round:
> > >
> > > "I know you want to be able to keep using this software, but the license
> > > agreement specifically notes Broadcast TV as having to pay a license, which
> > > we are not. If you can locate a legal approval for use, I would love to see
> > > it...Given that the mail list you asked about thinks it is legal to use, is
> > > not legal approval. You have a copy of the license, it says Broadcast TV
> > > needs to pay a license fee. We have not to my knowledge, thus you should
> > > stop using it."
> > >
> > > For the curious, here's the legal issue in question from the MPEG LA
> > > License for MPEG-4 Video FAQ:
> > >
> > > "Where MPEG-4 Visual material is provided for remuneration, video providers
> > > may be required to pay royalties for the right to use the decoders and
> > > encoders in the following circumstances:
> > >
> > > -MPEG-4 Visual material is provided for direct remuneration (for example,
> > > remuneration is from a user for a subscription and the number of different
> > > subscribers exceeds certain minimums, or for specific video titles).
> > >
> > > -Remuneration is from other sources (for example, free over-the-air
> > > broadcasting)."
> > >
> > > I know people here in the group tend to think having a valid copy of
> > > Quicktime Pro with the MPEG option will cover end-users, but I now need to
> > > find official documentation from somewhere stating this is in fact true.
> > > Anyone have any ideas?
> > >
> > >
> > > Steve Pankow
> > > Creative Services Editor
> > > KEZI-9
> > > Eugene, Oregon
> > > stevepankow@
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
No comments:
Post a Comment