Talk:MP3

message: Hi,
There seems to be a slight error in the header format image. According to the standard, the sync word is 11 bits and the version ID 2 bits. In the image, the sync word is 12 bits and version ID 1 bit.
-Kristian  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.88.71.190 (talk) 09:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in header format image 

message: The illustration of mp3 file structure, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mp3filestructure.svg, indicates that MP3 sync word is twelve bits, all 1. However, some other sources I've consulted indicate that the sync word is only 11 bits:
* http://www.mp3-tech.org/programmer/frame_header.html
* http://eyed3.nicfit.net/_modules/eyed3/mp3/headers.html
* http://mpgedit.org/mpgedit/mpeg_format/mpeghdr.htm
Please advise. Aldebrn (talk) 15:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in "File structure" figure? 

message: The "Encoding audio" section states, "During encoding, 576 time-domain samples are taken and are transformed to 576 frequency-domain samples. If there is a transient, 192 samples are taken instead of 576." This needs more context. 576 samples per what? I assume "per frame", but this needs to be explained in the article by someone more familiar with the technology. - dcljr (talk) 02:47, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  576 samples 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on MP3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090723213246/http://bmrc.berkeley.edu:80/research/mpeg/software/Old/mpegfa31.txt to http://bmrc.berkeley.edu/research/mpeg/software/Old/mpegfa31.txt
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110504042035/http://www.technicolor.com/en/hi/discover/intellectualproperty to http://www.technicolor.com/en/hi/discover/intellectualproperty
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article only lists a few patents that are still active. I've collected a list from various web articles that discuss MP3 licensing. I can't verify if this list is exact, exhaustive, or if these are related to MP3 or just MPEG-? layer ? formats in general.
* patent number, expiry date, link to patent
* 5703999 18.11.16        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5703999
* 5579430 26.11.16        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5579430
* 5850456 06.02.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5850456
* 5878080 07.02.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5878080
* 6185539 19.02.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=6185539
* 6023490 09.04.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=6023490
* 5960037 09.04.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5960037
* 6009399 16.04.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=6009399
* 5924060 29.09.17        http://patft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?patentnumber=5924060
Some sources:
* http://www.osnews.com/story/24954/US_Patent_Expiration_for_MP3_MPEG-2_H_264/
* http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/MPEG_patent_lists#MPEG-1_Audio_Layer_3_patents
At least the last source is too optimistic. As an example, it claims that patent 5924060 expired in 2011. You can see from http://www.google.com/patents/US5924060 that they paid the fee (year 12) a bit late in 2011 so it should be valid at least until 2014-2015. Google claims they haven't paid the latest year (16) fee yet so the current situation is not clear, but I can't see why it wouldn't be enforceable until 2017. If you infringe the patent in 2017, you can still be sued until 2019.
2001:2003:F638:A000:BE5F:F4FF:FE76:8CA0 (talk) 02:33, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: On fedora legal, Tom Callaway of Redhat wrote: "Red Hat has determined that it is now acceptable for Fedora to include MP3 decoding functionality (not specific to any implementation, or binding by any unseen agreement). Encoding functionality is not permitted at this time." https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/legal@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/34NPNTJITRHRP2FRKKYGL2YMEUU4BDYF/ So Redhat at least seems to think that MP3 is patent free so far as decoding is concerned. Jrincayc (talk) 15:40, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patent situation in 2016? 

message: From the article:
:Except for three patents, the US patents administered by Sisvelhttp://217.27.95.141/media/files/US%20MPEG%20Audio%20Patents%281%29.pdf had all expired in 2015, however (the exceptions are: , expires February 2017, , expires February 2017 and , expires 9. April 2017.
Note that these three patents were filed in 1997, so it is highly unlikely that they read on decoding of MPEG-1 layer 3 audio, since the 1997 was well after the 1993 MPEG-1 specification.Jrincayc (talk) 03:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sisvel patents 

message: 119.128.5.157 (talk) 05:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2016 

message: Read here https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/en/ff/amm/prod/audiocodec/audiocodecs/mp3.html
So does that mean ALL patents have expired and no one needs to pay ever anymore? Even the one last patent as wikipedia says that will expire end of this year? -- 5.145.128.4 (talk) 12:19, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fraunhofer says on their website patents have expired 

message: Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:31, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP3 @ 25 

message: I remember it differently; the pro version of l3enc was distributed as 'warez' and was the golden standard (most people encoded to 128 joint-stereo), there was also another encoder that was simpler to use but didn't sound as good and created files ending in .!!s (you had to rename them manually to .mp3) but was quite a bit faster than the Fraunhofer encoder. After some time there was a commercial encoder by Xing that took on Fraunhofer with their own encoder. One of the things coming out of this battle was the variable bit rate variant, encoding up to 320 etc.
Just putting it here in talk, as those who were around will probably remember this, but of course there's no official publication that would back this up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.2.7.215 (talk) 19:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early MP3 history 

message: In the section History>Development when the members of the ASPEC group are listed, it says "Deutsche" (as in German, the adjective) right after France Telekom. Was this meant to be Deutsche Telekom? Skylar Mlem (talk) 12:20, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Deutsche" member of ASPEC group