Are you able to actually play any of the Apple trailers? I get an error: "Could not initialize the supporting library", but this could be due to an unrelated bug. My impression from this forum is that totem is buggy in general, at least in Trisquel.
If the videos can be played without non-free software, then watching them through totem is better freedomwise than watching them through iTunes. The trailers themselves are presumably non-free, but since they are not “information for practical use” this on its own is not a FSDG issue. > My concern with banning Apple movie trailers is, wouldn't banning it > mean you'd have to ban all of YouTube? That wouldn't be good. I think there is a difference between banning and not promoting. Not including a channel by default is not a ban, since the user is still free to add that channel. Including it by default promotes it. Apple is a nasty company, and I don't see why they deserve the privilage of being promoted by Trisquel. I feel the same way about including Amazon and Google as one-click search engines in Abrowser. There is another issue, which is that these videos are trailers. Trailers are intended to encourage the viewer to watch the full movie. Can the full movies be accessed through totem? I doubt it, in which case they will encourage the user to view the film elsewhere. It is often very difficult to obtain some films without DRM or non-free software. It's probably not a good idea to advertise a film unless you provide a freedom-respecting path toward obtaining that film. I assume that this Apple crap is from upstream. I wonder what the default newsfeeds in Lifrea are in Ubuntu? In Trisquel, they are all freedom-friendly sources like LibrePlanet and the Trisquel forums. I doubt that these are the defaults in Ubuntu. Perhaps the default channels in totem could be replaced with something a more freedom-friendly source than Apple. > But, you could argue that Apple movie trailers is something very > specific, and that specific thing should be banned while non-specific > things like YouTube should not. I feel the same way about YouTube. There is nothing wrong with providing Trisquel users with a means of watching Youtube videos without proprietary software, such as avideo (which should replace youtube-dl), but there is no reason to actively promote Youtube. If Trisquel promotes any websites for obtaining media, they should be freedom-respecting ones like Libre.FM or MediaGoblin. > By the way, Videos is a great way to search and view YouTube videos > without proprietary JavaScript. My only gripe is that it fetches > videos in MP4 format instead of WebM, so it won't work on stock Fedora.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
