Slashdot Mirror
Canonical Offers Sale of Proprietary Codecs for Ubuntu
ruphus13 writes "Playing DVDs on Linux that required proprietary codecs has been a source of much pain. Ubuntu (or anyone else, for that matter) is not legally allowed to redistribute these codecs. So, users were left with sub-optimal choices. Convert the multimedia to an open format, acquire new media, or use a codec 'found' on the web, which may be illegal. In its continued effort to have a seamless and slick user experience, Canonical made the hard choice to offer the sale and support for proprietary codecs that users had to actually purchase for Ubuntu. This is not a fight Canonical can fight alone, and they are sure to get some grief for the decision."
Every time I convert someone to Ubuntu, the first thing I always do is download and install the "illegal" mplayer codecs. Otherwise, the poor user will click on some multimedia file and get that god-awful "search for codecs" dialog, which is usually enough to freak them out. It makes them feel they are dealing with a lesser OS, because it doesn't "just work" like they've come to expect (of course, they usually didn't install Windows either or they'd know better).
I hope Canonical will just sell the install media (and download) with the codecs already in it. That would work really well for a lot of people. A boxed Ubuntu with all codecs on the store shelves for about $30 - $45 right next to the Windows Vista boxes (on sale for JUST $199!) would probably do quite well. Plus the word would start getting out how much easier it is to install and live with than Windows.
Yes, I wish we lived in a world where all formats, protocols, and standards were Free, but they never will be so long as capitalism remains our official state religion. Meanwhile, we still want to watch our movies and play our music.
Caveat Utilitor
...this actually makes sense. (What that says about the legal structures in place, of course, is a separate question.)
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
New convertees to ubuntu (and there are a lot of them) might think that this whole "linux is free" thing is just a scam. Time will tell.
It depends how the streamlined process puts it.
If it is clearly stated that mostly all of linux is free, but in some legislation, there are patent fees applying for some technologies needed to access media.
If its clearly worded, the convertees could even better understand why everyone is making such a fuss about the patent system with this concrete example : There this nice thing called Linux, should be free for anyone to use, but no, because of some obscure patent, you're forced to pay.
Of course this problem is mainly constricted to English language where the word "free" collides two separate ideas of "freedom" and "costs nothing".
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Whatever you may think about software patents, the fact is that Canonical only has three choices here:
0) Not offer this software
1) Include the software for free, and break the law in some countries
2) Offer legal software, and pay the licensing fees
Ubuntu is my favorite distribution, and I'm happy to see legal, supported DVD playback.
I'm really tired of reading reviews that say "Great distribution, but it can't play back any of my media."
Now let's get Dell, Gateway, etc. to start pre-installing Ubuntu with the extra media options. It will be a better out-of-box experience than Vista.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
One of the things I've always liked about Ubuntu is their decision to give the users the choice between running completely free and open source software or accepting proprietary [(though often still free (as in beer)] software on their computers.
While I think it shameful that the DVD producers have decided that I need to pay extra to run a DVD that I already own, I applaud Canonical for giving me the option to do so easily.
It looks like the final piece has dropped into place for Linux! Linux is getting preinstalls from major vendors (in Netbooks especially, but moreso in general too). Wine had a 1.0 release quite awhile and is still improving rapidly. Now, the multimedia perplex is also solved.
For those of you not already familiar, World Domination 201.
Game! - Where the stick is mightier than the sword!
At that point, people distributing Ubuntu to friends need to specifically say that it costs $90. Unless they believe that said friend doesn't want streaming media or dvd playback.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Do other dvds work? If so, then it's the discs, stupid.
Yeah, I'm that stupid. Thanks for pointing it out.
Yes other discs work in linux. Guess what though, those SAME DAMN DVDS work great in the SAME DAMN HARDWARE, booted to Windows.
Thanks for the snarky comment, though.
Or, like me, they will say "fuck that" and use "illegal" codecs, laws be damned.
I'm not creating content with your proprietary codecs, so you can fuck off with your royalties.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
How can anyone see this as bad? Canonical is giving you a CHOICE - *not* vendor lock-in. You can still install codecs in any other fashion suitable for your situation - but for those who don't WANT or have the knowledge of HOW to install them illegally, manually, or what have you - this is a new option.
Go Canonical! Go choice!
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Here is the real win for Canonical... OEM pre-installs.
Its doubtful that anyone who downloads Ubuntu for free will pay for these things... they will find the no-cost alternatives and use them.
What this does do however is give OEMs who want to pre-install Canonical a legal way to include these encumbered bits of software and roll the cost into the sale price of the computer/device the customer is purchasing.
So really this is a mechanism aimed at people buying computers with Ubuntu pre-installed, who won't be given a choice as to whether or not to spend the money on these things. The cost will be included in the price tag of the device.
It's actually a pretty smart move, and makes Ubuntu more attractive to OEMs.
OEMs and Ubuntu boxsets.
I thought this was already an option in Fedora (others??). You try to play something you don't have a codec for, a util pops up offering to let you buy and install what you're after. Your choice. Easy enough to opt-out.
Oh, and Fedora has had 'zero-conf' wireless for some cards for a bit now too.
Sorry, I just don't seem to understand all this Ubunutu fanboyism when so much of what folks say is 'great' about it has already been done, elsewhere. But then it's promulgated like some revelation unique to Canonical's efforts.
Don't get me wrong - Ubuntu has it's place. But, it's not "The Source" itself. There are many, many distros doing new things, breaking ground, developing facets we ALL benefit from. Hoisting one distro up as "the one" only leads to inevitable disappointment.
Splorf! When you can get a cheap new DVD player for $20 to $30 at $BIGBOXSTORE, $50 to enable the codec on your computer is a /bit/ excessive.
They're pricing themselves out of the market. If I started feeling guilty about installing ubuntu-restricted-extras and not paying the intellectual-property tax, I might consider paying $10 to $15 to play DVDs and media files, but not $90.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
The problem is that the makers of a Free Software implementation, like LAME, will not get a license to use the patents because they are not the distributor, EVERYONE who gets it is a distributor. Apple can pay fees based on the number of iPods sold, but with Free Software a license fee for a single unit could be payed, then the recipient of that single unit can copy it indefinetly around the globe without paying anything.
If, on the other hand, the recipient had to pay for the number of copies distributed (and those recipients had to, and so on), then the recipient would be receiving the software without the right to redisribute it (either copied or modified). This violates the GPL's 'liberty or death' clause which says that if the recipient doesn't get all of the rights specified in the license then you're simply not allowed to give it to them.
In other words, nobody can obtain a license, and even if they did they would be prevented from sharing that codec with anyone under similar laws. What this results in is the entire world complaining about codecs and decryption software because America contains some very powerful cretins, along with "sueing everyone" being both a valid career option and a business plan for said cretins.
My Fedora 9 installation offered me direct links to Fluendo for codecs, and Firefox also has direct links to Fluendo for plugins.
So is it just that ubuntu has woken up that makes this news ?
No, the fact that the computer costs the same with or without windows means that I didn't pay for windows.
That assertion is just patently false.
If you bought a machine without windows for the same cost, then you paid the OEM for some additional profit/overhead.
If you bought a machine *with* windows for the same cost, then you paid MICROSOFT for WINDOWS.
*Your* money flowed from your credit card, to the OEM's bank, and then on to Microsoft's coffers. It doesn't matter whether you "give a shit" about it. Facts is facts.
It may be worth noting that these codecs of which you speak are perfectly legal throughout most of the world.
This is just one of the times I'm proud not to be a US American. (Is there a less-clumsy word for people from the US?)
At that point, people distributing Ubuntu to friends need to specifically say that it costs $90.
Those in the know will use the free drivers (and tell their friends where to get them).
Free-as-in-speech software purists need proprietary codecs like a vegan needs a steak-knife, so they have nothing to complain about - unless they think that Joe Potential-Switcher, given the choice between (a) sticking with Windows/Mac or (b) converting their entire media collection to open formats (which you can't do without a codec for the source format anyway) is going to choose (b).
...if you do decide to fork out $90, that isn't a lot if you offset it against the metric shitload of OS and application software you just got for free, and if that includes a nice little something for Canonical on the side then, well, they deserve it.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
I wish they would sell wireless drivers there too.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.