How about a "patent-free" version of Ubuntu?

[hexion]

Ok, in USA people have software patents, and Ubuntu could be sued if certain packages are shipped (it affects in example to some font rendering algoritms).

But USA is not the world, and there are many other parts of the world in where there's NO such software patents. In example, Europe.

So, why would USA laws affect the whole GNU world??? I can't understand it.

I think Ubuntu should ship a patent-free version for next releases. It should show a disclaimer in the web warning it (sadly) wont be able to be used in certains parts of the world like USA (I don't know any other with software patents).

You know, Ubuntu is GNU/Linux for Human Beings... and Human Beings don't need to be affected by USA laws (unless the human beings live in USA)


EDIT: No, Gobuntu is not what I'm asking for... Gobuntu is Ubuntu without propietary software so it's more restrictive than Ubuntu.
What I'm reffering on is a distro with no limitations about wheter the software (wheter it's free or propietary) shipped has "patented code" or not. Intented to be used in the parts of the world where those patents are not applied.

EDIT2: No, I don't mean to "remove all patented code from Ubuntu", such as double click patent and [insert here any weird patent that already exist].
In opposite, I mean to "include patented code" in certain packages (such as font rendering related packages). So Ubuntu can be completed with certain features that cannot be implemented in only some parts of the world, not the whole one.

EDIT3: This thread is not an attack to any country. It's a defense to the freedom of software. I use the USA example because I don't know any other country with software patents (and because I believe that the fact that all distros restrict themselves to not use patented algoritms is because of their influence... but this is just a personal belief)

[bethaviv]

It's asking for trouble...

The USA may not be "the whole world" but they do have quite an influence.

[dradul]

It already exists, it is part of Canonical offerings and it is called Gobuntu. Download from the usual places.

[bethaviv]

I thought all Gobuntu was is strictly based only on OpenSource material (which K/X/Ubuntu already support), but they strip the restricted and closedsource software out of it.

But what I don't get is why he couldn't just install it if it needs it. There are no patent laws that effects him, so he shouldn't have to worry about anything.

[hexion]

I thought all Gobuntu was is strictly based only on OpenSource material (which K/X/Ubuntu already support), but they strip the restricted and closedsource software out of it.

But what I don't get is why he couldn't just install it if it needs it. There are no patent laws that effects him, so he shouldn't have to worry about anything.


Well... I do. I installed many packages with "sofware patents" because I live in Europe and that laws don't affect me.
But what I'm asking is an official version free from that restrictions. There are millions people out there who live in countries without software patents.

And, for the record, I resist to the idea of "the USA have a lot of influence, so its rules should apply the rest of the world". They don't apply to me in any way and they never will. The day other countries start applying USA rules in their own contries for whichever reason, will be a very very sad day for mankind.

It's a shame that this is in fact what ALREADY happens in the GNU/Linux world.

[bethaviv]

And, for the record, I resist to the idea of "the USA have a lot of influence, so its rules should apply the rest of the world". They don't apply to me in any way and they never will. The day other countries start applying USA rules in their own contries for whichever reason, will be a very very sad day for mankind.

Lol.. I'm not saying that it's right... but I am saying that that it is what happens. It's fact. I'm glad that you're resisting it and I hope there are more people like you, but my comment was not meant to offend you.

[hexion]

Lol.. I'm not saying that it's right... but I am saying that that it is what happens. It's fact. I'm glad that you're resisting it and I hope there are more people like you, but my comment was not meant to offend you.

I know, and my comment was not meant to offend you neither :). If there's something strange in my words, keep in mind that English isn't my mother tongue (and please, feel free to point at the "strange expressions", I'm trying to improve it..)

EDIT: I know that that's what's already happening... that's why I wrote this thread... it's time to change that fact ;)

[bethaviv]

I know, and my comment was not meant to offend you neither :). If there's something strange in my words, keep in mind that English isn't my mother tongue (and please, feel free to point at the "strange expressions", I'm trying to improve it..)

Lol.. np.. what you wrote was just a little blunt, so I just wanted to make sure we were on the same page =)

[sicofante]

I agree. Create a specific Ubuntu version for software-patent countries. That would not only make us (the rest of the world) happier, but it would also show the world what software patents do to consumers.

It would be a bold and political move. Isn't making people aware part of our mission?

With Europe not supporting software patents and Canonical headquartered in Europe, I think this is a great opportunity to show the world a firm stance.

Go for it!

[cmccauley]

It isn't true to say that there are no software patents in Europe. You can still gain a patent for a "Computer Implemented Invention" if it is innovative and solves a technical problem. What you cannot do is obtain a patent for the implementation in software of a business process. So no "one-click checkout" patents for e-commerce for example. This is a particularly sensible approach to patents which in and off themselves are not a bad idea.

The manner in which European software patent legislation was almost "reformed" without adequate public consultation was particularly worrying.

[sicofante]

I know software patents in Europe are a grey area right now, but AFAIK there would be no issues with the kind of patents we're talking about, such as codecs and all that stuff you can download after an install.

[asimon]

Gobunto is not patent-free, it just doesn't include non-free software, this is a big difference.

Shipping a "patent free" distribution is not possible at all. There exist far too many patents on trivial things like progress bars or hyper links.

Also know that there exist software patents in Europe, see European Software Patents: Assorted Examples (http://eupat.ffii.org/patents/samples/index.en.html). You may not be able to patent a pure software algorithm, but evidently there are ways around such obstacles.

[hexion]

Shipping a "patent free" distribution is not possible at all. There exist far too many patents on trivial things like progress bars or hyper links.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we are talking about opposite things...
I'm talking about a distro free of patent restrictions, not about a distro without any algoritm patented anywhere.

[Zdravko]

Gobuntu is supposed to be that.

[hexion]

Gobuntu is supposed to be that.

No, it's not

[jaybombalous]

I don't think the thread starter understands what he is saying!

As the one guy said 'Its impossible to ship ubuntu patent-free!' What the thread starter wants is a distro that has all the things installed that would be illegal to install in the states without permission granted through whatever means necessary.

The thing is, ubuntu should not be a catch all for every piece of software out there. I personally like to think ubuntu only needs the things installed by default to run the system and give me the ability to install future software when I need it. Adapt does that very well.

Ask me this relates more to whining and crying about the fact that it takes a few more minutes to install something that not everyone else wants or needs for many of reasons.

[bruce89]

Better get rid of everything then - http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/06/02/2222258.shtml?tid=109&tid=155&tid=187&tid=99

[jaybombalous]

I'd also like to know how one plans to implement a security feature to stop people like me (A GOD AWFUL AMERICAN) the ability to d/l a ubuntu version as suggested.

This leaves great liability on Canonical to please a few foreigners.

[jaybombalous]

Better get rid of everything then - http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/04/06/02/2222258.shtml?tid=109&tid=155&tid=187&tid=99


a patented double click? How does one patent a action motion?

[bruce89]

a patented double click? How does one patent a action motion?

That's American law for you. Horrible to think it's based on Scots law.

[rsambuca]

I think the OP is obviously a little confused with his word usage, but I think what he wants is called Linux Mint.

[hexion]

I think the OP is obviously a little confused with his word usage, but I think what he wants is called Linux Mint.

Instead of writing an insult like that, better point at the concepts you think I'm confusing (in any case, I would be confused in some concept, not in the word usage, wouldn't I?)


By the way, any moderator there? I think some posts could be interesting for him/her.

[bruce89]

By the way, any moderator there? I think some posts could be interesting for him/her.

That's what the report button is for.

- Ubuntu is an ancient african word meaning "I can't configure Debian".

I found Debian much easier to install than Ubuntu, its GUI installer starts much faster than Ubuntu's Desktop CD installer does, and is much faster.

[23meg]

"A little confused" isn't an insult; it's a slightly harsh statement with which to note one's difference of position or discontent, albeit ambiguously.

rsambuca, please go on to politely state the points you think the OP is not clear about.

hexion, in the future, please use the "Report" button to inform moderators about specific posts which you think are rude, harassing, etc.

[hexion]

I found Debian much easier to install than Ubuntu, its GUI installer starts much faster than Ubuntu's Desktop CD installer does, and is much faster.

First learn the meaning of "joke" and then go trolling elsewhere...
This thread is to talk about some very specific issue, for anything else /dev/null

[hexion]

"A little confused" isn't an insult

A little confused about some concept is not an insult.
A little confused with his word usage, actually is.


hexion, in the future, please use the "Report" button to inform moderators about specific posts which you think are rude, harassing, etc.

I did. But this doesn't seem to stop converting from a place to discuss an idea into a sort of troll cavern.

[23meg]

I'm temporarily closing the thread until tempers cool down, in an attempt to prevent a flame war. Check your PMs.

[23meg]

Opening again. Please keep strictly on topic, refrain from personal attacks, and don't turn this into a "my nation is better than yours" fight.

[rsambuca]

My apologies to the OP for the comment in my previous post. It was not meant as an attack and it obviously didn't come out as intended.

Sorry.

[rsambuca]

OK, I just saw your edits to the first post. I do think you want Linux Mint. It is built on Ubuntu, but contains many codecs that are not necessarily legal in the USA, but it can do most multimedia out-of-the-box.

Perhaps in the future you can just make a new post instead of editing old ones. Some of us only read the new posts, so edits to old posts may go unseen...

[sneax]

I think I understand what topic starter wants. All he wants is this;
- Make an Ubuntu version that has no USA patents infractions
- Also make an Ubuntu version for the rest of the world where USA patents are not looked at. In this version we can include codecs, font rendering algorythmes, ... that are in america patented but in the rest of the world free to reproduce.

[plun]

This question is impossible to solve in this forum

You can use what software you want until someone claims
that this is patent protected and file a patent infringement claim

Groklaw gives a deeper picture about this:

MS and EU
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071022114731199

Redhat and Novell
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071011205044141

In long term its probably impossible to have this system in US with abstract patents, it only opens for "patent trolls" and never ending jurisdiction. (my personal opinion)

[viciouslime]

I'd also like to know how one plans to implement a security feature to stop people like me (A GOD AWFUL AMERICAN) the ability to d/l a ubuntu version as suggested.

This leaves great liability on Canonical to please a few foreigners.

It wouldn't be up to canonical to stop you downloading it. And if anything you would be the foreigner, canonical being a european company...

Also if you look at the many polls on here as to where people are from American users of ubuntu are the minority. There are considerably more Europeans.

[ronacc]

as an American I sympathise with the OP . While I believe the idea of patents is not a bad thing , it has been so poorly applied in the area of software that it is stifiling the very thing it was intended to nurture, creativity.Software patents as they currently exist are a monster that will eventualy bite us ( america ) in the butt, and I am truly sorry for any grief they are causing the rest of the world.

[asjdfwejqrfjcvm msz34rq33]

as an American I sympathise with the OP . While I believe the idea of patents is not a bad thing , it has been so poorly applied in the area of software that it is stifiling the very thing it was intended to nurture, creativity.Software patents as they currently exist are a monster that will eventualy bite us ( america ) in the butt, and I am truly sorry for any grief they are causing the rest of the world.Then again, it takes only one command for him to install all of those patented codecs.
I think that a 'patent-free' Ubuntu would just be asking for trouble.

[hexion]

My apologies to the OP for the comment in my previous post. It was not meant as an attack and it obviously didn't come out as intended.

Sorry.

Np :) My apologies too for taking that as a personal attack. In fact, I believe that the only real attacks came from the only one I didn't answer. But that's another story, let's fit to the topic.


It wouldn't be up to canonical to stop you downloading it. And if anything you would be the foreigner, canonical being a european company...
I was also surprised that person nationalized all the software Ubuntu ships (not Canonical itself)... now that I am more calmed, I find it funny :lolflag:

OK, I just saw your edits to the first post. I do think you want Linux Mint. It is built on Ubuntu, but contains many codecs that are not necessarily legal in the USA, but it can do most multimedia out-of-the-box.

The real point of this idea, and my real intentions, are not to ship the distro with codecs. The most important thing (as someone noticed) is to make a political move to show the world the problem with software patents.

Now, some countries such us USA (I always state that example, but it's because I don't know any other example) have a real problem with software patents, but it doesn't mean the whole world has to be affected. The point is not to have better font rendering out of the box, or have X or Y feature. It's to show the world that we think software patents are a problem, and we wont live with that unless every single country decide it (and even in that case, some people will keep on fighting them :) )

And the problem is that all the distros are adopting those restrictions, just because they are distributed too (but not only) in restricted (by soft. patents) countries such as USA.
Well, here in Europe there was a fight around the software patents and (correct me if I'm wrong) they weren't accepted. So why has the whole world to be restricted that way?

Ubuntu has a very important role now because it's the most used distro. I think, it should use its name to fight for software freedom... and this is a good move in that direction.


Perhaps in the future you can just make a new post instead of editing old ones. Some of us only read the new posts, so edits to old posts may go unseen...
I did it that way because I thought it was better for the newcomers. So they don't question it over again ;)

[bethaviv]

I do think the US would benefit from losing it's software patent system (kinda rediculous sometimes)...

By releasing a version of Ubuntu unhindered by patents, Ubuntu might as well declare war on the US patent system (and any other country that has a system in place). They would be saying, "We don't care about your crummy system." Which is not a smart way to try to change things.

I don't think that is an idea Canonical should entertain. They have already made a name for their Ubuntu products, it *is* the most popular distro, but I think they would lose face in the US if they bring out this version. Maybe not for the adverage Joe user, but for big companies and businesses.

But while they are the most popular Linux distro, they are not the most popular OS. Microsoft (possibly other Linux distros as well) and other large software companies might pounce on this.

Open source is great, I love using Linux everyday... I think in order to combat this issue, programs need to come out, completely free and open to combat this issue. Eventually there won't be a need for software with software patents tied to them. There will be a similar program offered, patent free.

Ubuntu shouldn't back down, but it's not always smart to pick fights (whether it's the US or another country or anything).

[plun]

And the problem is that all the distros are adopting those restrictions, just because they are distributed too (but not only) in restricted (by soft. patents) countries such as USA.
Well, here in Europe there was a fight around the software patents and (correct me if I'm wrong) they weren't accepted. So why has the whole world to be restricted that way?

Ubuntu has a very important role now because it's the most used distro. I think, it should use its name to fight for software freedom... and this is a good move in that direction.


The challenge is that we lives in a global world and for corporate institutions there must be a 99,99% "insurance" that a distribution is legal.

All money lies in corporate solutions. For sure MS understands this.
ref Novell and Redhat.

One proposal from EU about patents was that it must be new hardware involved within a patent. For example if Ericsson or Siemens develops a new base station for mobile transmission with both hardware and software. Also genetic BIO patent was discussed. Not a new software function to a PC....:) or a screen... but no decisions.

Because of the situation in US with patents /"intellectual property"
there will be problem for open source. A global company with business in US don't want trouble with patents.

Neverthelss this is really difficult...

[hexion]

The challenge is that we lives in a global world and for corporate institutions there must be a 99,99% "insurance" that a distribution is legal.

But I'm not telling to convert the current distro in a "patent-free" one (not at least for the meantime, I hope someday...), but to make a "new taste" of Ubuntu for countries without software patent issues.
What's the legal problem with that? Many solutions out there do that. They just put an advertisement to warn the residents of those countries that they cannot use certain versions. And then, if they do, it's their fault.

[Steveway]

So to stop the complaining I created a Distribution of Ubuntu that you can use with absolutely no doubts.
Attached is the .iso of my Distribution that includes absolutely no software that could use patented code or other patented things.
Feel free to download and use it as you want, you'll be safe if you use this.

[hexion]

So to stop the complaining I created a Distribution of Ubuntu that you can use with absolutely no doubts.
Attached is the .iso of my Distribution that includes absolutely no software that could use patented code or other patented things.
Feel free to download and use it as you want, you'll be safe if you use this.

I think you'd want to read again the first post. Concretelly, the "EDIT2" point.

[Steveway]

I think you'd want to read again the first post. Concretelly, the "EDIT2" point.

Doing this would be illegal in the US and maybe some other countrys.
So what you say? "Let's just forbid those people to use it then?"
I don't think that the GPL allows that.
So untill the Americans change their stupid patent-system we all have to suffer.
Say thanks to "Uncle Sam".
But if you life somewhere where these laws don't apply (rest of the world) then go ahead and install your codecs and other patented software, it's legal for you and Ubuntu makes it really easy.

[hexion]

Doing this would be illegal in the US and maybe some other countrys.
So what you say? "Let's just forbid those people to use it then?"
I don't think that the GPL allows that.
So untill the Americans change their stupid patent-system we all have to suffer.
Say thanks to "Uncle Sam".
But if you life somewhere where these laws don't apply (rest of the world) then go ahead and install your codecs and other patented software, it's legal for you and Ubuntu makes it really easy.

Sorry, but I don't want to answer the same questions over and over again. Those ones have been replied more than once in the whole thread.
Everything but the GLP bit. Well... I do believe GPL has nothing to do with this. In fact, you can question the FSF what do they think about software patents :)

[vade]

I do believe GPL has nothing to do with this.
Does the gpl2 allow you to distribute gpl'ed code inside a package that also contains material that prohibits the package's distribution in the US? I haven't read the gpl2 but wouldn't be terribly surprised if it had such restrictions.

[Steveway]

1 Free Redistribution, you may sell or give away the source.

2 Source Code, must be included with the binary form, or available at no more than a reasonable reproduction cost-preferably. I.e on cd-rom or via the Internet.

3 Derived Works, you must be allowed to modify and redistribute under the same terms as the license of the original software.

4 Integrity of The Author's Source Code, the license may restrict distribution of source in a modified form only if it allows bundling with patch files.

5 No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups.

6 No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor, you man not restrict business or other to use you program in their business, even if you don't like what they produce.

7 Distribution of License, the license apply to all whom the program is redistributed to, double license is not allowed.

8 License Must Not Be Specific to a Product.

9 License Must Not Contaminate Other Software, the license may only apply to that piece of software, and may not demand that other pieces of software use the same license.

These are the basic rules that genuine Opensource licences must obey.
Forbidding Americans to use the "no-patent" Ubuntu version, seems to be against No 5.
I think we need a lawyer for more detailed information.

[hexion]

These are the basic rules that genuine Opensource licences must obey.
Forbidding Americans to use the "no-patent" Ubuntu version, seems to be against No 5.
I think we need a lawyer for more detailed information.

I'm not a lawyer, so don't take this much seriously... but.......

There's a huge difference between a software that states some people can't use it and a country that has certain laws than don't let you use certain software.

Nice try anyway :biggrin:

[ronacc]

it would not be Ubuntu or canonical that was "forbiding" us ( americans) from using it , it would be the US gov't doing the forbiding and I do not believe that that would violate the GPL. It might bring grief on the US mirrors if the hosted that version though. Bring it on I'll take the chance that the software police will kick my door in at 3AM.

[plun]

But I'm not telling to convert the current distro in a "patent-free" one (not at least for the meantime, I hope someday...), but to make a "new taste" of Ubuntu for countries without software patent issues.
What's the legal problem with that? Many solutions out there do that. They just put an advertisement to warn the residents of those countries that they cannot use certain versions. And then, if they do, it's their fault.

Its nearly impossible to make such a dist, Ubuntu are using mostly upstream solutions.

This "patent" shows how difficult this is. (incredible)

http://www.google.com/patents?id=3tUkAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,072,412

And this complaint: ("patent troll")

http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/IPvRH-1.pdf

In the end everything is about business, Novell, Redhat, Canonical wants to earn money, and this money mostly comes from corporate
players and they want to be absolute sure that no one sues them.

[bvbellomo]

he challenge is that we lives in a global world and for corporate institutions there must be a 99,99% "insurance" that a distribution is legal

Unfortunately, there is no such guarantee possible with ANY technology. Whether you are using Linux, Windows or a toenail clipper, I could file a patent AFTER the software shipped and sue you for using it. Or I could claim a patent I held before applies when the creator of the software feels it doesn't.

Ultimately, what matters is the ruling of the patent getting approved and what happens in court. Both of which tend to be decided by people with little or no technical knowledge.

A 100% guarantee from Ubuntu or whoever else that you cannot be sued is worth absolutely nothing in court (unless Ubuntu happens to be suing you).

[plun]

A 100% guarantee from Ubuntu or whoever else that you cannot be sued is worth absolutely nothing in court (unless Ubuntu happens to be suing you).

Nope its impossible, thats my point.

Latest chapter in the "soap opera".

FFII: EU tells open source to start paying MS patent tax

http://lwn.net/Articles/255481/

[hexion]

Nope its impossible, thats my point.

Latest chapter in the "soap opera".

FFII: EU tells open source to start paying MS patent tax

http://lwn.net/Articles/255481/

The word "impossible" is a really subjetive one.

That "article" you linked talks about the resolution about the claimings of the EU to force MS to show their protocols to 3rd party enterprises in order to ease the conectivity of their applications. The resolution states they'll have to pay 10.000$ to MS if they want to access to that information.

The writer of the article, wrongly (and in an interested way if you ask me) claimed that that would be for FOSS groups like paying MS for a patent tax. But that's not true.

Right now, the EU don't recognize patents in software algoritms so no one has to pay MS for the patents they filed in USA. Paying voluntarily for their internal information (if some enterprise thinks they want it for their bussiness) is one thing, paying forcely for using "intelectual property" is another. So that "article" (to call it somehow, because I'm really disappointed with it) has nothing to do with this thread's subject.

[plun]

Right now, the EU don't recognize patents in software algoritms so no one has to pay MS for the patents they filed in USA. Paying voluntarily for their internal information (if some enterprise thinks they want it for their bussiness) is one thing, paying forcely for using "intelectual property" is another. So that "article" (to call it somehow, because I'm really disappointed with it) has nothing to do with this thread's subject.

Well, this was an press release from FFII and not an article.

http://press.ffii.org/Press_releases/EU_tells_open_source_to_start_paying_MS_patent_tax

[hexion]

Well, this was an press release from FFII and not an article.

Not what the url you wrote says:
http://lwn.net/ Articles /255481/
:lolflag:

[captaink]

I resist to the idea of "the USA have a lot of influence, so its rules should apply the rest of the world".
In this you're wrong.! USA doesn't have a lot of influence, but it's Canonical that is an American Company, like RedHat, like Novell. So do these companies accept USA Laws, but still their distros are used around the globe by millions of users.

If you want a distro full of restricted and non-OSS software, choose a european distro, like Linux Mint, or SabayonLinux. There are many linux distros out there, so try some and choose your flavour. But don't expect from Canonical to include in their default installation nonOSS.
Besides, non-OSS exist in universe and multiverse and restricted repos, just install them from there. Where is the problem? All the rest is just in someone's mind...

[hexion]

In this you're wrong.! USA doesn't have a lot of influence, but it's Canonical that is an American Company, like RedHat, like Novell. So do these companies accept USA Laws, but still their distros are used around the globe by millions of users.

Read before stating. From wikipedia:
Canonical Ltd. is a private company founded (and funded) by South African entrepreneur Mark Shuttleworth for the promotion of free software projects. Canonical is registered in the Isle of Man and employs staff around the world, along with their main offices in London and support office in Montreal.

South Africa: Africa (not USA)
London: England (not USA)
Montreal: France (not USA)
Isle of Man: an island in the sea of Ireland (not USA)

So stop putting flags on things you don't even know.

If you want a distro full of restricted and non-OSS software, choose a european distro, like Linux Mint, or SabayonLinux.

Again, read before stating. I'm not talking about free software vs propieraty software. (read again the first post or the whole thread)



/me tired of repeating the same over and over again just because some people insist in not reading before posting :(

[rsambuca]

I think if you quit editing 5 day old posts and post new ones, and also changed the title of the thread, you may get better discussion. It is clear from your posts that you don't want a "patent-free" version, you want a version that "ignores patents". Huge difference.

[hexion]

I think if you quit editing 5 day old posts and post new ones, and also changed the title of the thread, you may get better discussion. It is clear from your posts that you don't want a "patent-free" version, you want a version that "ignores patents". Huge difference.

I can't edit the title. At least I don't know how to. If some moderator can help with this: the title "How about a version of Ubuntu free of "software-patents"?" would be better. (I don't like the word "ignore" in this issue.. ;) )
And, let me differ with you, I AM replying in new posts. In fact, more than I should because nobody throws new interesting info here... just the same wrong statements over and over again.

Also, I think I explained well what I'm reffering on in the first post (appart of the thousands of replies). So if people just read the title which I can't change... and posts without bothering of at least reading some posts, it's not my fault.

[rsambuca]

I can't edit the title. At least I don't know how to. If some moderator can help with this: the title "How about a version of Ubuntu free of "software-patents"?" would be better. (I don't like the word "ignore" in this issue.. ;) )
And, let me differ with you, I AM replying in new posts. In fact, more than I should because nobody throws new interesting info here... just the same wrong statements over and over again.

Also, I think I explained well what I'm reffering on in the first post (appart of the thousands of replies). So if people just read the title which I can't change... and posts without bothering of at least reading some posts, it's not my fault.

I guess I just don't agree with your semantics.

The phrase "free of 'software-patents'" still is not accurate. Whether you agree with them or not, the patents do exist, and are applicable in some jurisdictions. Therefore, to release a version of Ubuntu in the US that contains patented software is not 'free of software patents', it is simply ignoring them (whether you like the word or not).

[hexion]

I guess I just don't agree with your semantics.

The phrase "free of 'software-patents'" still is not accurate. Whether you agree with them or not, the patents do exist, and are applicable in some jurisdictions. Therefore, to release a version of Ubuntu in the US that contains patented software is not 'free of software patents', it is simply ignoring them (whether you like the word or not).

I'm sure you're right on this because english isn't my mother tongue... so if some moderator read this, please change the title according to rsambuca's suggestion.

The bit of the ignore word was just because I like more "fight against" the nonsense of software patents, rather than "ignoring" them :P
But you're right, this Ubuntu version would just ignore patented ideas/algoritms (the software itself is not what's patented, some parts of it can be). And, in my point of view, ignoring those patents where they don't apply is a way of fighting them :)

[gwoodard]

This may be a "stupid" opinion but if Ubuntu was patent-free then Microsoft could steal more of the programming, call it it's own and sue Linux (even though Linux is run by volunteers) for using "Microsoft's software"

[hexion]

This may be a "stupid" opinion but if Ubuntu was patent-free then Microsoft could steal more of the programming, call it it's own and sue Linux (even though Linux is run by volunteers) for using "Microsoft's software"

You are confusing patents with licenses, I believe..
BTW, Ubuntu cannot change any term of the licenses of the software it ships.

[captaink]

Read before stating. From wikipedia:
Canonical Ltd. is a private company founded (and funded) by South African entrepreneur Mark Shuttleworth for the promotion of free software projects. Canonical is registered in the Isle of Man and employs staff around the world, along with their main offices in London and support office in Montreal.

South Africa: Africa (not USA)
London: England (not USA)
Montreal: France (not USA)
Isle of Man: an island in the sea of Ireland (not USA)

So stop putting flags on things you don't even know.



Again, read before stating. I'm not talking about free software vs propieraty software. (read again the first post or the whole thread)



/me tired of repeating the same over and over again just because some people insist in not reading before posting :(

Ok, u got me, I didn't know all those details.
I don't really know if USA laws are affecting the rest of the world. But, if that was the case, I guess Canonical wouldn't allow packages that carry patents or proprietary software to be present in their repos, like fedora project team does with their repo. So, I don't beleive that this is the case.
I hope I was on subject this time :)

[vexorian]

"Patent-free"

That's a nice name confusion. You are asking for the opposite of something that would be patent-free.

I don't think this is necessary. Aren't Restricted Codecs all the things that you want? Or do you want those to be installed by default? Is it really so bad to download a restricted codec after you double click a media file?

...
Recently the EU has sold out to MS, apparently , they are giving MS the right to state they actually have patents. I wouldn't be surprised the EU approves software patents (yes, and citizens will let it happen because they don't know stuff) And yes, once the EU allows MS to actually mention their patents in a deal it means your EU is way too friendly with software patents...

[gwoodard]

You are confusing patents with licenses, I believe..
BTW, Ubuntu cannot change any term of the licenses of the software it ships.

Hmm...I remember Microsoft buying out LG (something about cross patents)

www.newzfire.com/linux_open_source/microsoft-strikes-linux-patent-deal-with-lg-electronics-techweb.html

[jariku]

Montreal: France (not USA)
Actually:

Montreal: Canada

[mysticmatrix]

Ok, in USA people have software patents, and Ubuntu could be sued if certain packages are shipped (it affects in example to some font rendering algoritms).

But USA is not the world, and there are many other parts of the world in where there's NO such software patents. In example, Europe.

So, why would USA laws affect the whole GNU world??? I can't understand it.

I think Ubuntu should ship a patent-free version for next releases. It should show a disclaimer in the web warning it (sadly) wont be able to be used in certains parts of the world like USA (I don't know any other with software patents).

You know, Ubuntu is GNU/Linux for Human Beings... and Human Beings don't need to be affected by USA laws (unless the human beings live in USA)


EDIT: No, Gobuntu is not what I'm asking for... Gobuntu is Ubuntu without propietary software so it's more restrictive than Ubuntu.
What I'm reffering on is a distro with no limitations about wheter the software (wheter it's free or propietary) shipped has "patented code" or not. Intented to be used in the parts of the world where those patents are not applied.

EDIT2: No, I don't mean to "remove all patented code from Ubuntu", such as double click patent and [insert here any weird patent that already exist].
In opposite, I mean to "include patented code" in certain packages (such as font rendering related packages). So Ubuntu can be completed with certain features that cannot be implemented in only some parts of the world, not the whole one.

EDIT3: This thread is not an attack to any country. It's a defense to the freedom of software. I use the USA example because I don't know any other country with software patents (and because I believe that the fact that all distros restrict themselves to not use patented algoritms is because of their influence... but this is just a personal belief)

Ok but do you realize that any ubuntu developer living in USA or who wishes to travel to stands to be arrested and harrased even if he is resident of other country?
See for example case of Dmitry Sklyarov.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov

In fact we all could be arrested for having discussion as illegal as that if we ever went to US.
Also, how much do you think your country would like to protect you with US in such a strong position? It's only country to use Nuclear bomb and still insist that other country should be prevented from developing them.
Hmnn, I guess only solution to your problem is to explain dumb US citizens that his country is the worst example of so called "freedom" they enjoy.

EDIT: Plus I suddenly remembered that GPLv3 doesn't allows sort of thing you are proposing.

[tomcat2007]

There are already disclaimers issued regarding certain code when you install it. It's left to the end user to determine the legal implications of the jurisdictions in which they reside (or visit) e.g. the warning I received when installing code that enables me to view DIVX & listen to MP3 formats. I cannot recall the precise wording but I do remember the context to be legal warnings.

[tomcat2007]

In fact we all could be arrested for having discussion as illegal as that if we ever went to US.No, actually you could not, at least not legally. Your discussion, as an intellectual exercise rather than a criminal conspiracy is protected speech.

Also, how much do you think your country would like to protect you with US in such a strong position? It's only country to use Nuclear bomb and still insist that other country should be prevented from developing them. Hmnn, I guess only solution to your problem is to explain dumb US citizens that his country is the worst example of so called "freedom" they enjoy.It occurs to me that U.S. citizens are quite aware of what is happening in the U.S., more so than those observing from a distance. It's kind of like sex... you can watch it, or you can experience it, and as a U.S. citizen I can tell you that we aren't kissed first.

I've also lived abroad... and have yet to see a government that pays much attention to the people they are supposed to represent.

Oh... <MODE=SELF_SPANK>This thread was originally about patented code in Ubuntu, wasn't it?</MODE>

[Sisophon2001]

There are clones of Ununtu that address your needs. Have a look at "Mint".

Linux Mint is an Ubuntu-based distribution whose goal is to provide a more complete out-of-the-box experience by including browser plugins, media codecs, support for DVD playback, Java and other components. It is compatible with Ubuntu software repositories.

This distribution is produced in Ireland and conforms to European patent laws.

I prefer to stick with the original, and add what I want. I takes me a few days to set everything up, but I am not complaining.

Garvan