[asterisk-users] Some queries on g729 license.

[Matthew Rubenstein]

	As far as I know, the g729 patent requires buying a license to operate
any implementation of it, whether Digium's, Intel's, or any other.
Digium is set up to collect royalties (perhaps at a favorable rate) as
part of their license from the patent holder. I don't know about Intel
or any other. Or what the mechanics are for enforcing the patent on
someone who operates a codec without a license.


On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 10:51 -0500, Al Bochter wrote:
> What about the free open source G729
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Al Bochter
> Bochter Services
> http://www.BochterServices.com/?t=Email
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
> 
> >	I connect to a PSTN carrier over SIP which requires me to connect with
> >a g729 codec. I'm using them for just robocalling: Asterisk server
> >originates calls which play a prerecorded file. Can I pre-encode those
> >stored files in g729 so they don't need to be encoded for each call? If
> >so, do I need a g729 license for each call, or just a license for the
> >preencoder? If the robocalls accept incoming DTMF, do I need g729
> >licenses for those calls?
> >
> >
> >On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 04:08 -0700,
> >asterisk-users-request at lists.digium.com wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 13:47:39 +0800
> >>From: Leo Ann Boon <leo at datvoiz.com>
> >>Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Some queries on g729 license.
> >>To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> >>        <asterisk-users at lists.digium.com>
> >>Message-ID: <45A1DAFB.9070704 at datvoiz.com>
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> >>
> >>Xue Liangliang wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Hi, all
> >>>
> >>>I am a pabx vendor from Singapore. Recently we are going to
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>implement 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>a failover solution for our customers using heartbeat, the asterisk 
> >>>server can failover perfectly, however the g729 codec canot work, 
> >>>because it is binded the mac address, we have bought two set of 
> >>>licenses, can you provide us some workaround for this scenario?
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>It shouldn't be a problem if you're only doing IP takeover and have 
> >>bound the licenses to each server separately.  If you're sharing the 
> >>storage, then that could pose a problem.
> >>
> >>Leo
> >>DatVoiz Singapore Pte Ltd 
> >>    
> >>
-- 

(C) Matthew Rubenstein