Canonical Explains Decision to License H.264 For Ubuntu

tux writes with this snippet from The Register: "Ubuntu's commercial sponsor Canonical has tried to clarify how — if not why — it has licensed a closed-source and patented codec for video on PCs running its Linux. Canonical is the first Linux shop to have agreed to license the codec in question, H.264, from MPEG LA. Even though Red Hat and Novell are also available for use on PCs, they have not licensed H.264."

Comments

Thank The FSF/GNU Nutcases

[Anonymous Coward]

The faster the open source world jettisons these FSF and GNU kooks the better.

Re:Focus

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember XFree86? Barely anyone does. Why? Because when the people behind it started to pull licensing tricks that put users off, they forked it, created x.org and said a very polite "fuck you" to the newly licensed XFree86. Now barely any distribution uses it.

They need to justify their decision because if it looks like they're trying to burn the OSS community rather than contribute to it, it's going to piss a lot of people off. They're giving out a product that most people are never paying a cent for, they need people USING Ubuntu to be able to make these revenue-sharing deals, license codecs needlessly, etc. If those people suddenly decide to switch over to ANOTHER product that's being given out for free (Gentoo-Ubuntu exodus, anyone), there goes their mindshare and the potential for turning a profit.

I can only assume you called the problem a "no-brainer" because you didn't even put yours to use before making that post. Judging by your posting history, I'm guessing you're just a troll anyway, and I've just given you what you want. Alas.

I can certainly give you something in return though -- spam. Enjoy!

enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com
enderandrew@gmail.com

Let's see how long it takes some bots to pick that up.

Re:Uh, cause that's where everyone's headed?

[Khyber]

"H.264 is where web video is going."

That's what you think. I don't know about you but I was in direct contact with MPEG-LA lawyers recently about their licensing terms (confusion over what constituted commercial use,) and given the terms of their licensing as stated and clarified directly to me, I'll not be surprised to see many, many sites ditching H.264 in favor of something free. You may think theora's a non-starter but you know what, you're all focused on technical limitations and other bullshit when you should worry about "DOES IT FUCKING WORK OR NOT?" That answer is yes, and since it does work, it's viable enough.

Re:Good thing

[Anonymous Coward]

But if you ever want Linux to gain desktop marketshare, you have to compromise something at this point. You can fight for those later, but at this point, casual people will not start using Linux if it doesn't just work.

If you try to fight for it all now, you will lose the whole war. Fight a single battle at a time.

- sopssa

H.264 is an open standard for all

[darrenm]

H.264 is an open standard for all... 'Cause Steve Jobs told me so.

I'm an AUTHOR damn it

[Anonymous Coward]

I wrote a lot of GPL'd software in that distro that I have copyright to. I have something to say about it just like any other copyright holder does. Whether I feel like spending the rest of my life in litigation with them and whether I'd get anywhere doing so is a separate matter. I'm not going to pursue anything like that, but I have every right to be pissed. The combination of my GPL stuff and the patented stuff is a derivative work as I see it, and got to be a common practice because GPL enforcement was too lax in the early days. Foo.

Re:Good thing

[Compaqt]

The way some people are saying "just do what people want", I would think that they'd cheer even more if Ubuntu just stopped distributing Linux and became an MS Windows OEM and wholesaler.

Re:Good thing

[smash]

Have fun not being able to use your box for plenty of stuff.