Slashdot Log In
Canonical Offers Sale of Proprietary Codecs for Ubuntu
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Fri Sep 19, 2008 01:46 PM
from the just-trying-to-help-the-users dept.
from the just-trying-to-help-the-users dept.
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."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)
You should look into wpa_supplicant, on Debian/Unstable (so I guess ubuntu should have this also) it couldn't get any easier: /etc/network/interfaces: /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf
allow-hotplug wlan0
iface wlan0 inet manual
wpa-roam
iface home inet static
address 10.0.1.67
netmask 255.255.255.0
gateway 10.0.1.254
iface elsewhere inet dhcp /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf:
network={
ssid="myhomessid"
id_str="home"
scan_ssid=1
key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
psk="areallytopsecretpassphrase"
}
network={
ssid="FON_AP"
id_str="elsewhere"
scan_ssid=1
key_mgmt=NONE
}
But you are using WEP at home? I hope you know what you are doing.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)
WPA supplicant is a mess. I should be able to type in a network name and passhprase at a prompt, and be done with it.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)
For many it's the only way to get a reliable WPA connection.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)
http://ipw3945.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
intel wireless chipsets are NICE. I bought a dell laptop with ubuntu pre-installed that came with an intel wireless chipset, I have no problems whatsoever.
the big thing for ubuntu would be to pressure other hardware makers to go the same route as intel, guess it hasn't been working out. as a customer I prefer to support intel and other hardware manufacturers that provide support for Foss drivers.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Informative)
No they aren't. My laptop came with an ipw2100. If in the presence of more than a few APs the card will hang and the driver will restart it, hanging everything for a second or two. This is a bug that has been known about for years [launchpad.net] and still isn't fixed. I gave up waiting for them a while ago and replaced the piece of crap with an Atheros card. No more hangs.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)
No, there's a lot of crap you have to do to get iPods working...
It doesn't actually conform to the USB Mass Storage spec, at least not for music. File storage, sure, but otherwise, no.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it is more appropriate to blame a broken patent system than capitalism itself. Patents impede competition which is an important concept in capitalism.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course, the other half of the market system is a legal framework that does not encourage socialism. That is, make producers liable for the products, and prevent the government from limiting those liabilities. Of course, in the name of public safety and stability, there is some benefit to some market meddling. Of course, the problem occurs when government socializes businesses while stil leaving them in large private hands, as has happened this week in the US. The executives reap huge rewards while the taxpayer takes a bath.
So, in this case, there is no simple legal and free way to get a driver for linux, so the market created one, in terms of gray market drivers. The market has also created a 100% above board driver. The only question remains, for a market point of view, is it worthwhile to prosecute those that use the grey market download. Certainly from a socialist point of view it is, because the government will pay the bills, and the right owner will reap the reward. Perhaps from a law and order point of view this is also prudent. But what it comes down to is that patents do not be defended to remain valid, the money lost through these grey downloads are likely not significant, and like MS Windows, the benefit of universal access probably outweighs any issue of lost revenue.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, 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.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly, and well said. It's unfortunate that those of us who speak out against software patents are labeled amongst the tin-foil hat socialist crowd that is somehow against inventors, the free market, or demand government intervention (which is what patents are). As you suggested, software for specific purposes is very limited in duration (presumably because it becomes outdated within that time frame). I think patents are a very important protection for tangible inventions, but they're a horrible thing when it comes to software--or formulae, as you stated. As an aside, I love that simplification you offer, because it brings everything to the crux of the matter which is that software patents are oftentimes very narrow in scope and involve either an algorithm or a user interface that is so blatantly obvious, prior art has likely preceded any patent by years!
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, 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.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, 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!?"
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Funny)
This is why I gave-up on proprietary OSes.
That word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)
I recently tried Fluendo's free version and it didn't sound right and seemed to have artifacts. I instead went to pacman and downloaded their mp3 codec and things sounded much better.
Maybe the Fluendo pay version is better than the free one. At any rate, I hope Ubuntu offers good codecs for sale so people still aren't turned off from Linux.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Insightful)
No that is really really really bad, you now have free Linux and pay Linux. The free Linux will bw see as crippleware and 10 years down half of a Linux system will be closed source paid apps with shinny DRM. This is a dangerous precedent.
Parent
And wireless too (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm no poly sci major, but I think patents constitute government interference in the free market.
Sure, and telling you what side of the road to drive on is interference in Darwinism.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, Insightful)
The problems experienced can be traced back to the 1913. No, not just since Monday.
Parent
Re:Finally! (Score:4, 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?
Parent
Not new, just streamlined. (Score:5, Interesting)
Depends. (Score:5, Insightful)
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".
Parent
Re:Not new, just streamlined. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Parent
Given the legal structures in place... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
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
Good on 'em! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Good on 'em! (Score:4, Informative)
"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,..."
No, they have not decided this. They charge a license for codecs to DVD player manufacturers as well but those are built in to the devices out of the box so the costs are already part of the price set by the manufacturer. With computers, you do not purchase the ability to use your system as a DVD player simply y purchasing hardware, you purchase the codecs, and subsequently, through the OS or similar solution such as the one offered by Ubuntu.
Parent
Looks like the final piece has dropped into place! (Score:3, Insightful)
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 [catb.org].
uh huh (Score:5, Informative)
'Cos, y'know, it's not like you can just install VLC from Synaptic [ubuntu.com].
(VLC is also my favourite media and DVD player on Mac.)
Patent Fees and Supreme court decision (Score:5, 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?"
Patent Exhaustion -- continued (Score:4, Interesting)
http://spie.org/x26516.xml [spie.org]
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?
Parent
Woohoo! (Score:5, Insightful)
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!
Re:Somebody had to do it... (Score:5, Informative)
Streaming media and web stuff: USD$40 [canonical.com]. DVD playback: USD$50.00 [canonical.com].
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Somebody had to do it... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Parent
Re:patented, not propritary (Score:5, Informative)
No. I'm sure they're making a pretty penny here. The highest single codec license fee I know if is MPEG-2, which was $2.50 last I checked. VC-1 and H.264 are less than a dollar each.
Lots more about codec licensing than you'd ever care to learn can be found at http://www.mpegla.com/ [mpegla.com].
Parent
Re:Somebody had to do it... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Parent
Re:Somebody had to do it... (Score:5, Funny)
If you're getting Photoshop for free, too, then you shouldn't have any problem with the free Linux codecs. :->
Parent
Re:Somebody had to do it... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Somebody had to do it... (Score:5, Interesting)
strange, that is the same DVD drive that I use with my linux box. Didnt I already pay for the codec then?
Parent
Re:Canonical == Microsoft (Score:5, Informative)
I know you're just trolling, but for those who actually feel this way, look at it like this:
Canonical knows that a large proportion of Ubuntu users download and use the "illegal" codecs without paying the license fees (either directly, where it applies, or indirectly by using the programs that the codec can be legally used for). Canonical does not own these codecs and cannot legally provide or create free alternatives due to all of the craziness surrounding patent law. So they offer an option for their legally-conscious users and business users: fully-supported, license-fee-paid codecs that will not put their users in legal jeopardy.
Please tell me what the evil in this is.
Parent
...You blinded her? (Score:5, Funny)
On purpose? Did you go to jail?
Parent
Re:not illegal (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:But are they better? (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Parent