Mandriva One legal/not?

[m4tic]

It comes with those functionalities ubuntu avoids like .mp3 .avi .flv .etc, i cannot find someone who asked this question before on the net so i figured someone here has an answer to my question, is it "legal" .I have been using it since start of february and it feels as stronger than windows and nothinng i've used before. And about these legal issues, do they apply to all countries? I'm in South Africa and i don't think i could be prosecuted for MP3 on linux

[alexandari]

What the...

[m4tic]

What the...

In ubuntu help it says since linux is opensource they can't provide mp3 support, i want to know why is it so that mandriva one 2010 provide this functionality, is there an exception for it or what?

[howlingmadhowie]

as far as i know, creating mp3s is a problem all over the world unless you pay for the codecs. i'm not sure about playing mp3s. i am not a lawyer. this is not legal advice.

[stevie1989]

l don't see how mp3 is illegal too support as VLC does it, SongBird does it, etc.. and they're all open-source? But l see it's patent in Wikipedia? Let's not start a copyright flame war -_-

[Post Monkeh]

l don't see how mp3 is illegal too support as VLC does it, SongBird does it, etc.. and they're all open-source? But l see it's patent in Wikipedia? Let's not start a copyright flame war -_-

they can only play them with the correct codecs.

[m4tic]

they can only play them with the correct codecs.

Will ubuntu ever include these
correct codecs

[HermanAB]

Fraunhofer doesn't chage for their playback codecs. They only charge for the compression codec patents and the fee is about $3 per embedded system player. I'm pretty sure that no-one is going to drag you to court over $3.

So, relax and enjoy it.

[howlingmadhowie]

Will ubuntu ever include these

well, yes, when mp3s are more than 18 years old, provided an extension to a patent term hasn't been granted by then.

i'd say that ubuntu is a bigger target than vlc and it's also a company, so frauenhofer could decide to come after it.

[howlingmadhowie]

Fraunhofer doesn't chage for their playback codecs. They only charge for the compression codec patents and the fee is about $3 per embedded system player. I'm pretty sure that no-one is going to drag you to court over $3.

So, relax and enjoy it.


charging has little to do with if canonical is allowed to distribute the codecs with ubuntu. for example, adobe doesn't charge for the flash plugin, but it would still be illegal to distribute it.

[fatality_uk]

It's 100%, totally and utterly... no wait, that's importing cheese. Don't know if Mandriva is legal.

[swoll1980]

It's all about EULA. If Ubuntu chooses to include certain things in the distro, it wouldn't be freely distributable in certain countries. This is why it's not in there. One command fixes all that. I don't understand why this is such a big deal. You know when I bought my system builder copy of win7, it didn't come with Flash, or DVD play black either. I wish I could just type in a command to fix it, but it doesn't work that way. Since the DVD software that came with my burner isn't compatible with win7 I have to pay $15 to get DVD play back, even though I already payed for it.

[Tibuda]

Will ubuntu ever include these

the ubuntu music store will sell music in mp3 format (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOne/MusicStore), so for that to work they'll have to include at least the mp3 codecs. or we'll see tons of "cant play ubuntu music on ubuntu" threads on the forum.