Illegal Codecs Put Me Off Linux

[FloatingFatMan]

Do we?

Being on par with Apple's marketshare on the desktop would make linux a mainstream contender? If so, it already is.

Well, you don't exactly see it on the shelves of your local computer retailer, or being installed by computer novices, do you? Those are the markets Linux needs to penetrate if it's ever to go beyond the "geek" stage.

[ichi]

Well, you don't exactly see it on the shelves of your local computer retailer, or being installed by computer novices, do you?

I certainly don't (well, actually I've seen some SuSE boxes) yet it holds the same marketshare than Apple, whose stuff does sit on those shelves.

Interesting, huh?

*BTW: I don't see MacOS X nor Windows being installed by computer novices either.

[Black Beard]

Well, you don't exactly see it on the shelves of your local computer retailer, or being installed by computer novices, do you? Those are the markets Linux needs to penetrate if it's ever to go beyond the "geek" stage.

The vast majority of computer novices couldn't install Windows either.

[h3xis]

What about if you install VLC are you still breaking the terms?

Yes, even on Windows, AFAIK.

Well, you don't exactly see it on the shelves of your local computer retailer, or being installed by computer novices, do you? Those are the markets Linux needs to penetrate if it's ever to go beyond the "geek" stage.

I have, especially back when Red Hat 8-9 were popular. I've also seen SuSE and Mandriva.

I used fedora core 4 and played my mp3,flac and ogg files without a problem

It's not having anything to do with difficulty, but rather using code that violates patents.

[bangbang023 Veteran]

...

This guy will never get laid until he's 90.

That's probably the most useless comment I've read on Neowin in a long time. Congrats.

I used fedora core 4 and played my mp3,flac and ogg files without a problem

He's specifically talking about DVD and WMA/WMV files which require codecs protected by patents.

[markwolfe Veteran]

Doesn't everyone love the united states patent laws. Doesn't everyone love the united states patent laws. It's a CRIME in the US to play your mp3 file! It's so ridiculous.

That is a common misunderstanding (and one that the writer of the article fell victim to). Going to the Thomson / Fraunhofer (owners of the MP3 patent, and masters of licensing it) website, you see that they allow free use for home users. It is just the the distro makers cannot guarantee how that would be used (could be used commercially), so by distributing MP3, they potentially run afoul of the Fraunhofer license. In a nutshell, the MP3 license is more restrictive than the GPL, and not compatible. Therefore it cannot be included in a free-to-copy-and-distribute distro.

In a nutshell, I agree that the writer has incorrect assumptions, and by posting articles like this, with wrong conclusions and statements, he is (unintentionally?) spreading Fear of EULA violations, Uncertainty of the legality, and Doubt about how viable Linux is.

He's specifically talking about DVD and WMA/WMV files which require codecs protected by patents.

The author specifically mentioned MP3 on more than one occasion.

[southside]

That's probably the most useless comment I've read on Neowin in a long time. Congrats.

Useless but oh so true. Love it or hate it, its the truth.

[bangbang023 Veteran]

That is a common misunderstanding (and one that the writer of the article fell victim to). Going to the Thomson / Fraunhofer (owners of the MP3 patent, and masters of licensing it) website, you see that they allow free use for home users. It is just the the distro makers cannot guarantee how that would be used (could be used commercially), so by distributing MP3, they potentially run afoul of the Fraunhofer license. In a nutshell, the MP3 license is more restrictive than the GPL, and not compatible. Therefore it cannot be included in a free-to-copy-and-distribute distro.

In a nutshell, I agree that the writer has incorrect assumptions, and by posting articles like this, with wrong conclusions and statements, he is (unintentionally?) spreading Fear of EULA violations, Uncertainty of the legality, and Doubt about how viable Linux is.

The author specifically mentioned MP3 on more than one occasion.

My mistake. Wouldn't installing L.A.M.E. be legal, though?

Useless but oh so true. Love it or hate it, its the truth.

You know his sex life? Seriously, 12 year olds make comments like that.

[h3xis]

My mistake. Wouldn't installing L.A.M.E. be legal, though?

From Wikipedia:

Like most (if not all) MP3 encoders, LAME may contain technology covered by patents owned by the Fraunhofer Society.[2] The developers of LAME do not currently license the technology described by these patents from Fraunhofer. Distributing compiled binaries of LAME, its libraries, or programs which are derivative works of LAME in countries who recognize software patents such as the United States, may be considered infringing on the relevant patents held by Fraunhofer.

The LAME developers state that since their code is only released in source form, it should only be considered as a description of an MP3 encoder, and thus does not infringe any patent by itself when released as source code only. At the same time, they advise obtaining a patent license for any relevant technologies that LAME may infringe upon before including a compiled version of the encoder into a product.[3] It is worth noting that this view has not been tested by a court and may not provide any real protection to users or developers.

[bangbang023 Veteran]

Wouldn't the fact that Fraunhofer still hasn't gone after Lame amount to them not caring? I forget the exact legal terms, but I know that if you don't actively protect your product, the courts can rule that you showed indifference for so long that it no longer matters.

[southside]

You know his sex life? Seriously, 12 year olds make comments like that.

I dont care if someone 12 or 78 makes a comment like that. The truth is the truth no matter what age or how you look at it

That person is worried about legal issues yet hasnt done anything else illegal in his life? Thats BS. And thats why this guy will problably never get laided till 70s-80s.

You know why you say its a 12 year old comment? Because you yourself have surely used illegal codecs and have done other highly illegal things therfore you cannot relate. Granted, I have done my illegal stuff as well and I cant relate but I suppose thats how his life is; Boring, pitiful, and sexless.

[Diffused Mind]

I dont care if someone 12 or 78 makes a comment like that. The truth is the truth no matter what age or how you look at it

That person is worried about legal issues yet hasnt done anything else illegal in his life? Thats BS. And thats why this guy will problably never get laided till 70s-80s.

You know why you say its a 12 year old comment? Because you yourself have surely used illegal codecs and have done other highly illegal things therfore you cannot relate. Granted, I have done my illegal stuff as well and I cant relate but I suppose thats how his life is; Boring, pitiful, and sexless.

This man speaks the truth, something some people can't handle.

[bangbang023 Veteran]

I'm done arguing with the kids. Honestly, when someone's only retort to an editorial is "this guy's never going to get laid", I should realize that nothing meaningful will come out of the ensuing debate. It's an immature comment and does nothing to add to the conversation.

[Southern Patriot]

I'm done arguing with the kids.

+1

Neowin seriously needs to start banning users who make comments like that. Unfortunately, the majority of Neowin users are teenagers who think it's "cool" to break the law and think that anyone who thinks differently from them shouldn't be entitled to an opinion.

[Fish]

I clicked "OK". I'm not bothered one bit whether or not it's breaking the law, I just want to play my mp3's. As others have said, if it was a problem, mp3 would have tighter controls on it, and consequently it wouldn't be so ubiquitous.

Same with DVD.

People pay themselves a lot of money to argue the toss about this stuff. I really couldn't care less. I don't consider it as breaking the law, even though technically it is. I want functionality in my OS of choice. At the end of the day, surely that's all that matters?

[metallithrax]

How about using them for research purposes... "Researching" how you can convert all your mp3s to OGG or flac, and get smaller files with better quality :)

So how does that work then? Converting my mp3 files into a higher audio quality file. You cannot create high quality from low quality.

[Fugi]

I'm done arguing with the kids. Honestly, when someone's only retort to an editorial is "this guy's never going to get laid", I should realize that nothing meaningful will come out of the ensuing debate. It's an immature comment and does nothing to add to the conversation.

:yes:

[ichi]

Wouldn't the fact that Fraunhofer still hasn't gone after Lame amount to them not caring? I forget the exact legal terms, but I know that if you don't actively protect your product, the courts can rule that you showed indifference for so long that it no longer matters.

Maybe that doesn't apply to patents. At least if it did, it would be weird for MS to be claiming to have a list of patents infringed by linux and at the same time sit there doing nothing but milk those that buy into the story :shiftyninja:

Where it does indeed work that way is when protecting trademarks.

[myrhymeandreason]

Useless but oh so true. Love it or hate it, its the truth.

Or just your opinion.

[ScottKin]

...

This guy will never get laid until he's 90.

The only person who would say that is someone who somehow connects a PC using Linux to having/not having sex.

[I am Reid]

It has ALL to do with patents. Hence why it's only illegal in the US, and why there're distros that pay for a license in order to include those codecs.

Yeah, i mean really all the company did was create that format for ****s and giggles, they didnt really care about earning any of their money back.

[ScottKin]

Now we see what we are left with when schools remove Civics classes from their curriculum - a mass of people who clearly think that breaking the law (i.e. doing something illegal) is OK.

Based on that logic, my "Warn" level here should immediately be reduced to 0%, due to the fact that when (in the past) I pointed out to certain users here how utterly stupid they were I was only using my freedom of expression and Free Speech rights.

Of course, when I signed-up to be a member here, I agreed to the Rules and TOC of Neowin, which curtails what some people can say and what they can not say, and for my comments I was rightfully nuggied for my vitriolic comments. Since this is a private space, the owners of Neowin and their staff can make any rule they wish - as long as the users agree to be held responsible for breaking those rules. They could go as far as make a rule that states that everyone who posts in the forums must end all of their postings with "I Luv Pink Ponies" - the example given is ridiculous, but nonetheless possible. No one can cry foul and claim that they're being censored, because censorship is purely legal within the private space of places like this and the censoring is not being done by the Government.

(note: the following paragraph is not targeted at anyone in particular. The use of the word "you" is only in connection with people who feel that breaking the law is OK. If you do, then your own guilt exposes you)

So, where am I going with all of this? It's simple: breaking the law is just that - regardless of the chance of actually getting caught. If you think that it's perfectly fine to break a law as long as no one is aware of it, then I hope and pray that one day you get smacked over the head with the heaviest law book available - that, or when in caught in the commission of an illegal act that you or anyone committing that act is exposed in public...and that the breaking of that law is so incredibly stupid that the entire world laughs at you, revealing you as the utter idiot you are.

--ScottKin

[h3xis]

Now we see what we are left with when schools remove Civics classes from their curriculum - a mass of people who clearly think that breaking the law (i.e. doing something illegal) is OK.

Based on that logic, my "Warn" level here should immediately be reduced to 0%, due to the fact that when (in the past) I pointed out to certain users here how utterly stupid they were I was only using my freedom of expression and Free Speech rights.

Of course, when I signed-up to be a member here, I agreed to the Rules and TOC of Neowin, which curtails what some people can say and what they can not say, and for my comments I was rightfully nuggied for my vitriolic comments. Since this is a private space, the owners of Neowin and their staff can make any rule they wish - as long as the users agree to be held responsible for breaking those rules. They could go as far as make a rule that states that everyone who posts in the forums must end all of their postings with "I Luv Pink Ponies" - the example given is ridiculous, but nonetheless possible. No one can cry foul and claim that they're being censored, because censorship is purely legal within the private space of places like this and the censoring is not being done by the Government.

(note: the following paragraph is not targeted at anyone in particular. The use of the word "you" is only in connection with people who feel that breaking the law is OK. If you do, then your own guilt exposes you)

So, where am I going with all of this? It's simple: breaking the law is just that - regardless of the chance of actually getting caught. If you think that it's perfectly fine to break a law as long as no one is aware of it, then I hope and pray that one day you get smacked over the head with the heaviest law book available - that, or when in caught in the commission of an illegal act that you or anyone committing that act is exposed in public...and that the breaking of that law is so incredibly stupid that the entire world laughs at you, revealing you as the utter idiot you are.

--ScottKin

There is no way of being caught. I could call whoever is in charge of this all and say "lolz, I'm using mpeg layer three codecs on Linux!1!" and they'd wonder what douche bag was calling them. There are plenty of dumb laws in the United States that nobody follows because they're old - but they're still a law. Are you saying they should be followed? It's ridiculous and the author is doing nothing but succumbing to the abuse of copyright laws. In fact, I could probably go to the copyright holders of MP3 or any other proprietary format and tell them I'm using it on Linux and nothing would happen. The real problem exists when businesses and/or companies begin to incorporate unlicensed proprietary formats on their systems, which has nothing to do with the decision that the author made. He's just being silly about the whole thing and he's not spiting anyone but himself.

Edited July 19, 2007 by h3xis

[ichi]

Yeah, i mean really all the company did was create that format for ****s and giggles, they didnt really care about earning any of their money back.

Distros that include the codecs pay for the license, those who don't include the codecs obviously have no need to pay anything.

What was your point again?

[FloatingFatMan]

There is no way of being caught. I could call whoever is in charge of this all and say "lolz, I'm using mpeg layer three codecs on Linux!1!" and they'd wonder what douche bag was calling them. There are plenty of dumb laws in the United States that nobody follows because they're old - but they're still a law. Are you saying they should be followed? It's ridiculous and the author is doing nothing but succumbing to the abuse of copyright laws. In fact, I could probably go to the copyright holders of MP3 or any other proprietary format and tell them I'm using it on Linux and nothing would happen. The real problem exists when businesses and/or companies begin to incorporate unlicensed proprietary formats on their systems, which has nothing to do with the decision that the author made. He's just being silly about the whole thing and he's not spiting anyone but himself.

Of course they're not interested in individual users; BUT, if someone came along and told them, "I installed Boabob Linux* and it came with your codecs for free", and on checking they find the makers of Boabob Linux don't have a license, they'd be phoning their lawyers toot sweet.

Whether you think it's cool to freely break the law or not; it doesn't alter the fact that you ARE breaking the law, and it's one of the reasons (a minor one admittedly) Linux will STAY in the domain of the geek.

Oh, and to the 12 year olds who say "He won't get laided until he'd 90", grow up and learn English.

(* Not a real Linux distro!)