--------------------------------------------------------------------- > Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:35:30 +1300 > From: "Aaron Whitehouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Patent issues with automatic codec installation (was: > Automatic installation of DVD CSS support) > To: "Christofer C. Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > > > I would like to draw attention to a proposal that I think is very > > > important for Ubuntu as a desktop deistribution: the possibility of > > > automatically enabling CSS decryption support for DVDs, like it is already > > > possible to retrieve support for certain audio/video endcodings > > > automatically. > > > Please read the comments in the bug you linked to for explanation as > > to why this will not happen. > > As the comments in the bug state, the reason DeCSS is not included is > (I imagine) to avoid violating the DMCA. > > The more that I think about the automatic codec installation of > Ubuntu, the more that I am concerned that the current approach places > the distribution in murky legal territory. Allowing (encouraging?) a > user to install patent-violating codecs may not infringe the DMCA or > copyright, but it still may not be the best idea. Think of Napster > being sued for allowing others to infringe copyright. > > A large number of people respond to this by saying that they live in > Europe and that their country does not enforce software-only patents. > That doesn't matter much, considering that a patent-holder would bring > any proceedings in countries that did enforce their patents. > > Fedora handles the situation with > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureCodecBuddy - which > allows users to purchase non-infringing codecs from Fluendo. > http://www.fluendo.com/press/releases/PR-2007-01.html > > Perhaps a good compromise would be to default to Codec Buddy and have > a button for "Multiverse Codecs". When the user clicks the button, > they could be presented with a message *actively discouraging* them > from using the multiverse versions and highlighting that they are > likely to break the law if they do so. > > In an attempt to disarm critics, I ask you to read: > http://www.linux.com/articles/59830 > "On the patent question, Fluendo's official stance is that it opposes > software patents, but that in areas where they are the law, it has no > choice but to obey the statutes. Perhaps more importantly, customers > have no choice either. Some critics of Fluendo's plugin products are > quick to point out that there are freely available, often GPLed > libraries that decode the same formats. That is, however, irrelevant: > the non-free formats are non-free not because of the license on the > source code, but because of the patents on the format. > > Wherever possible, Fluendo encourages its customers to use patent-free > formats. "In GStreamer we try to make sure Ogg and Dirac support > everything that is possible to do with the non-free formats. So at the > end of the day we feel that by moving people toward Linux and now > Solaris, and to using an open source framework like GStreamer which > has top-notch support for free codecs, we do more good than evil for > the goal of removing the plight of patented codecs, even if our way of > achieving that is by offering those non-free codecs for sale." > [...] > Non-free media formats are fundamentally at odds with free software, > not because of source code licensing but because of patents. Ignoring > that fact can mean taking a serious legal risk. As Dave Neary of Wengo > so concisely expressed it on his personal blog: "People should realise > that proprietary codecs are just that -- proprietary. And if they cost > money, that's a great way to realise."" > > I am in no way associated with Fluendo (except for being a participant > in the codecs beta testing). I am simply concerned that Ubuntu makes > it too easy to infringe patents. > > As I raised on the mailing list and in a bug report: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/173161 > users often end up infringing patents that they never even use because > the codecs are distributed in composite packages. > > Regards, > > Aaron > > -- > FSF Associate Member: 5632 > http://www.fsf.org
Since when should linux users have to pay for codecs? Bloody hell. Are we heading down the Windows path? I would never in my life pay for any codecs? Why? Simply because a user shouldn't have to. C'mon, seriously, some common sense required I think. -- Chris Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
