[asterisk-users] G.729 pre-compiled binaries and Asterisk 1.2.x.

[Steve Totaro]

On Jan 15, 2008 12:57 AM, Andrew Joakimsen <joakimsen at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 14, 2008 7:50 PM, Steve Totaro <stotaro at totarotechnologies.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
>
> > I would argue that it is illegal.  The main definition of illegal is "
> 1.
> > against law: contravening a specific law, especially a criminal law".
> > http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/illegal.html
>
> Illegal means that something violates a criminal law. You linked to a
> page that describe the law in the US regarding patentholders
> registration of said patents. I'm not saying we should infringe on the
> patentholder's right I am simply saying it is not a criminal act, at
> least in the US.
>
> > While it may not be against criminal law in the US it can be in France
> and
> > Austria, in the US it is certainly "against a specific law".
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_law#Law
>
> Software is generally not patentable in the European Union (and
> probably in the countries that are pseudo-EU members)
>
> > Anyways, buying the license is the right thing to do unless you live
> where
> > software patent laws are not applicable.
>
> Totally agree.
> <http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users>
>

Did you even bother to read the definition of "against the law" that I
posted?  In that definition, "against law: contravening a specific law,",
that being violating patent law.  Then it goes on to say "especially a
criminal law"

Sorry Andrew, but I take Encarta's definition over yours.

Thanks,
Steve Totaro
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20080115/92cf127e/attachment.htm