Editing LAME (section)

== Patents and legal issues ==
Like all MP3 encoders, LAME implemented techniques covered by [[patent]]s owned by the [[Fraunhofer Society]] and others. The developers of LAME did not license the technology described by these patents. Distributing compiled binaries of LAME, its libraries, or programs that derive from LAME in countries where those patents have been granted may have constituted [[Patent infringement|infringement]], but since 23 April 2017, all of these patents have expired.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.iis.fraunhofer.de/en/ff/amm/prod/audiocodec/audiocodecs/mp3.html|title=mp3|access-date=2017-05-02|website=Fraunhofer IIS}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.audioblog.iis.fraunhofer.com/mp3-software-patents-licenses/|title=Alive and Kicking: MP3 software, patents and licenses (Fraunhofer Audio Blog)|publisher=Fraunhofer IIS|date=2017-05-18|access-date=2017-05-19|quote=The licensing program coming to an end is due to the fact that the last patent included in the program expired.|website=Fraunhofer Audio Blog}} The page's later caution about third-party implementation–specific patents is not about LAME's implementation. {{Citation needed|reason= How can one be sure that this caution doesn't relate to LAME?|date=October 2023}} </ref>

The LAME developers stated that, since their code was only released in source code form, it should only be considered as an educational description of an MP3 encoder, and thus did not infringe any patent in itself. They also advised users to obtain relevant patent licenses before including a compiled version of the encoder in a product.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://lame.sourceforge.net/tech-FAQ.txt |title=LAME Technical FAQ |last=Taylor |first=Mark |date=June 2000 |access-date=21 February 2008 |archive-date=8 February 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120208083016/http://lame.sourceforge.net/tech-FAQ.txt |url-status=dead }}</ref> Some software was released using this strategy: companies used the LAME library, but obtained patent licenses.

In the course of the 2005 [[Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal]], there were reports that the [[Extended Copy Protection]] [[rootkit]] included on some [[Sony]] [[compact disc]]s had portions of the LAME library without complying with the terms of the [[LGPL]].<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.foxnews.com/story/sony-bmg-software-may-contain-open-source-code |title=Sony BMG Software May Contain Open-Source Code |date=21 November 2005 |agency=Reuters |work=Fox News |access-date=2011-11-26}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-interweb.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/52-Is-Sony-in-violation-of-the-LGPL-Part-II.html |title=Is Sony in violation of the LGPL? |publisher=The-interweb.com |access-date=2012-03-17 |archive-date=24 January 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090124220936/http://www.the-interweb.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/52-Is-Sony-in-violation-of-the-LGPL-Part-II.html |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://hack.fi/~muzzy/sony-drm/ |title=Sony's XCP DRM |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051124032239/http://hack.fi/~muzzy/sony-drm/ |archive-date=24 November 2005 }}</ref>