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."

9 of 427 comments (clear)

  1. Not new, just streamlined. by pwnies · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The big thing here is not that they're offering them for sale, but that they're streamlining the process of the sale. The codecs have always been available for sale through fluendo's store, canonical is just making the process of sale slightly easier. The only thing I'm concerned about is that users will get the wrong message. 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.

  2. Re:Finally! by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If they want to make deals with the devil then they could bargain for better proprietary drivers for crap like advanced photo printers and iPods. Does Ubuntu have a decent zero-config wireless utility yet?

  3. Patent Fees and Supreme court decision by mlwmohawk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A little while back there was a supreme court decision about patent exhaustion. (I think that was the term.) It basically said that if company A licenses a patent to company B, and company B produces a product utilizing the patent and sells the product to company C, C does not need to pay A for the patent.

    I wonder if this is a useful defense against "illegal" codecs. I mean, the patent holder license the patent to the media creator and the media creator sells us the product. Shouldn't the patent obligation been handled between the licensor and the media company? Aren't we in fact, entity "C?"
     

  4. Re:Finally! by Tatsh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree they should definitely box up Ubuntu (Shuttleworth has got the funds) and start selling it right alongside Windows Vista. Even I might buy it just to support more GNU/Linux/FOSS development (Ubuntu is just one facet in the whole thing). $30-$45 is definitely a reasonable price for an OS that is 50x better than Windows and with that, free upgrades (I am assuming). People may not flock immediately, but with word they will.

  5. Patent Exhaustion -- continued by mlwmohawk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    http://spie.org/x26516.xml

    So, if patent exhaustion is more expansive than previously thought.

    If we purchase a DVD, should we not have also (included with the purchase) rights to the patent used in the product, i.e. the compression algorithms?

    The used the "IP" to produce the product and paid the license to do so. Why should we be further encumbered? It isn't as if we are creating new content with the codecs, we'd use free ones for that.

    Any lawyers want to start a class action for EVERYONE that owns a DVD player?

  6. Re:Finally! by Teun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The patent system is largely protecting the inventor.

    Indeed and for me rightfully so.

    But patents on Software (formulas you know) are not right.
    Some sort of reward for a developer might be appropriate but it has to be tied to the industry.

    And in software that means maybe only for 3 or 5 years max.

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  7. Re:Somebody had to do it... by berashith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    strange, that is the same DVD drive that I use with my linux box. Didnt I already pay for the codec then?

  8. Re:Finally! by Aphoxema · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sometimes the easiest way to give something away "for free" after no one will take it is to put a price on it. It's a little disturbing to see how often this is necessary at yard sales. People ignore the 'free' sign on the little end table that has nothing wrong with it, but the second I put a "25c" sticker on it someone comes along and goes "Is that really only 25 cents!?"

    --
    "Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
  9. Re:Finally! by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's just like what Redhat did in the early days.

    Ubuntu has never been about Free Software Purity.
    We have Debian for that. I don't see what the big
    deal is here. Are you people forgetful or just
    haven't been around long enough?

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.