multimedia codecs... hmmmmm

[JamesNorris]

I've been using linux for years, and in my time I've seen probabally thousands of "how can I play my mp3s" threads.

The answer is usually "install the mplayer 'all' pack" or something, but always with the clause "don't do it if it's illegal in your country"

I have been thinking, what about those people who it IS illegal for? Where to they go to get support for mp3 or somthing?
It's all fine and dandy for you and I to comvert our old mp3s to an open format like ogg vorbis, but computer-illiterate newbies can't do that. They just want to have what they have supported.

Is there somwhere we can direct people to, where they can buy an mp3 license for an individual? I see plenty on the internet about comany licesnses for games etc... but nothing for individuals.

Does this mean that if you want linux and mp3 in USA, for example, you either can't have it, or you break the law?

There has to be a better option that I've missed?

Can anyone say where an individual license can be bought from, or any other solutions to this?

[red_shrike]

I gues you can contact Frauenhofer Institut in Germany and ask them how much is the license:) Actually, MP3 owners have said that they will not sue Linux users (and other Open Source OS users) because of the MP3 issue. This probably comes from the fact that only 3% of PC's have Linux running their business (fun). I don't see why wouldn0t you break the law; you will be in greater problems because you have those MP3s without the original CDs (plus all those 'educational' movies) that nobody is gonna ask you for a license. Well, here on the Balkans nobody cares either way, so I guess I am out of the game. lol I will look around for the price of MP3 license, Goethe Institut might have something on that....(I doubt it)

[localzuk]

I believe the problem in this case is the fact that the proposition of selling individual licenses for MP3 playback would be a logistical nightmare for the patent holders. There are some commercial options out there - such as Linspire's CNR - which provides MP3 playback and also the commercial versions of many other distro's.

I wonder what it would cost Ubuntu to purchase licenses so MP3 playback can be included? I'm sure people would donate to the foundation to allow for this major hurdle to be overcome.

[Stormy Eyes]

I live in the US, and quite frankly, I'm content to disregard the law.

[Iandefor]

I wonder what it would cost Ubuntu to purchase licenses so MP3 playback can be included? I'm sure people would donate to the foundation to allow for this major hurdle to be overcome. I seem to recall the pricing for a license to be something like 35 cents US per license, or just pay 66k and be done with it. But Ubuntu's built around the ideas of Free Software, and I don't believe that they're about to go and do something like pay for an mp3 license and suddenly encumber part of the system from being redistributed freely.

But I think it would be awesome if somebody would make a media player for Linux that had all those yummy codecs and had them legally- even if you had to pay like, $10 for it. I'd drop $10 to get some legal codecs and a good media player to boot (I've yet to see a media player that I actually like).

[Arktis]

I wonder what it would cost Ubuntu to purchase licenses so MP3 playback can be included? I'm sure people would donate to the foundation to allow for this major hurdle to be overcome.Why? What's the point of continuing to support mp3 when you've got ogg? So what if Joe Blow doesn't know anything about it; why we should keep supporting a proprietary format when a good open one is availible? Because Joe Blow will never use insert Distro otherwise? Oh, NO!!!! Not that!

IMO, it remains that one of the biggest problems of the technological age that people are trading good things like security, reliablility, and freedom for conveniance. Screw that (Conveniance is not in itself bad, but it becomes so when you trade something good for it).

[jason.b.c]

I live in the US, and quite frankly, I'm content to disregard the law.

Heck yea, just watch yourself though, you might get old Boss hog and Rosco P Coltrain hot on your trail.;)

[Stormy Eyes]

Heck yea, just watch yourself though, you might get old Boss hog and Rosco P Coltrain hot on your trail.;)

I always keep some tar and feathers handy.

[Master Shake]

I live in the US, and quite frankly, I'm content to disregard the law.

I'm with Stormy on this one...

[junior aspirin]

im not sure if the law applies in the uk, but is it true that if you have windows installed on the pc you already own a license? or is that some rubbish i have heard/madeup?

[jason.b.c]

I always keep some tar and feathers handy.

:D ( Laughing ) :)

[JamesNorris]

I wonder what it would cost Ubuntu to purchase licenses so MP3 playback can be included? I'm sure people would donate to the foundation to allow for this major hurdle to be overcome.

No, I don't think you understood... I'm not saying I want ubuntu to provide mp3 support, it goes against the whole idea of free software. What I do mean, is that ubuntu should remain free, support the use of free codecs/software, but let the user know where they can purchase their support for mp3s if they're unable to convert their mp3s/wmas to ogg.


Why? What's the point of continuing to support mp3 when you've got ogg? So what if Joe Blow doesn't know anything about it; why we should keep supporting a proprietary format when a good open one is availible? Because Joe Blow will never use insert Distro otherwise? Oh, NO!!!! Not that!

IMO, it remains that one of the biggest problems of the technological age that people are trading good things like security, reliablility, and freedom for conveniance. Screw that (Conveniance is not in itself bad, but it becomes so when you trade something good for it).

Hold on, you're being very naive there... How many people go from proprietary to foss in one go? People don't just say "right, I'm sick of MS, I'm gonna convert all my mp3s/wmas into ogg, re-save all my .doc files as .odts refuse to talk to any of my friends on MSN Messenger, I'll only use open IM software with an open protocol etc... And then, when I've done that, I'll install *nix and never use proprietary ever again?

You get people a bit at a time. First they test the water, what is this linux thing? I hear it can save me money... They give it a try, with all their proprietary stuff intact. Then they learn about it, it's ethics, the community... Then they make a conscious decision to go the foss route.
You can't force people down the foss route if they don't want to. Let them choose. Keep reminding them of the foss alternatives, sure, but let them also know how to take the transition slowly

[FISHERMAN]

im not sure if the law applies in the uk, but is it true that if you have windows installed on the pc you already own a license? or is that some rubbish i have heard/madeup?
-This varies from country to country, I don't know much about UK-regulations
-Microsoft has paid the various patent holders so they can legally include MP3, (commercial) DVD,... + MS also includes their own WMA/WMV codecs.
So if you buy Windows, you are licensed to use them...on your Windows partition.
If you want to use them on another computer or OS, you'll probably have to have to buy another license. (but as far as I know, you don't have to pay a license for MP3 if you install them separatly)

[endersshadow]

I tried contacting Panasonic about paying for DVD codecs...since I actually do care whether or not I'm stealing from someone...and they pretty much told me to bugger off...so, I use the rogue ones...oh, the rebel that I am...

[Stormy Eyes]

I tried contacting Panasonic about paying for DVD codecs...since I actually do care whether or not I'm stealing from someone...and they pretty much told me to bugger off...so, I use the rogue ones...oh, the rebel that I am...

As far as I'm concerned, if I can buy a DVD reader and install it in my PC, then I have every right to use that device to watch DVDs.

[endersshadow]

As far as I'm concerned, if I can buy a DVD reader and install it in my PC, then I have every right to use that device to watch DVDs.

Yeah, I understand that.

As for why I did it: I'm a staunch Libertarian and I firmly believe that people have the responsibility to uphold both their own rights and the rights of others, and that an infringement upon any right is inherently wrong and should not be done. But when I contacted Panasonic and told them that I wished to legally obtain the codecs, they scoffed at me, and I told them I would be forced to use the illegal codecs. As far as I'm concerned, they gave me the permission to use the "illegal" codecs with their disinterest and response.

So, go ahead and use those codecs! When given the option of having me pay for them or me steal them, they told me to steal them! Let us go!

BTW, please don't turn this into a political argument, just explaining the reasons for my actions. I believe in living my principles and not just spouting off about them. Leave it at that.

[angkor]

I'm with Stormy on this one. I think if I buy a DVD legally I have every right to watch where and on whatever I choose.

I recently found this on Ubuntu btw:


/usr/share/doc/libdvdread3$ cat README.Debian
libdvdread for Debian
---------------------

Many DVDs use css. To play these discs, a special library is needed
to decode them, libdvdcss. Due to legal problems, Debian cannot
distribute libdvdcss, but it is available on other places on the
internet. If it is legal for you to use css, you can run
'/usr/share/doc/libdvdread3/examples/install-css.sh' at any time to
download and install it.

Didn't know that script existed and it makes watching dvd's incredibly easy on Ubuntu / Debian :)

[mostwanted]

To anyone who might ask "Is this illegal in my country?". Many multimedia codecs are protected by software patents (or rather, the methods for decoding them are), this is what makes unlicensed decoders illegal in countries who have software patents. Currently, the only nation in the world that I'm aware of which has software patents is the USA. There might be others in asia or something, though, I'm not sure.

There was a proposal by the commission for an EU-wide software patents law, but it was rejected by very large majority vote in the parliament, thankfully (something like 700 to 20 or something), so to my knowledge no EU country has software patents.

Still, just because a format is legal to decode in your country, doesn't mean you should begin using it. A closed format is STILL a closed format no matter how many people use it legally.

[briancurtin]

I live in the US, and quite frankly, I'm content to disregard the law.
bingo. i will not think twice about disregarding that law.

[rcmiv]

To me, simply disregarding the law so one can play a DVD, while appropriately Thoreau-ian (Thoreauvian? Thoreau-ish?), misses the importance of much larger issues.

Software patents, abuse of copyright, and the various intellectual property legislation efforts that are going on right now in the U.S. and Europe do not bode well for the personal freedoms of the citizens of those countries.

If it were up to the RIAA, MPAA, Microsoft, the BSA, and countless other very well funded and connected lobbies, you wouldn't be running linux right now at all, let alone watching an illegally decrypted videostream of King Kong on it.

And keep in mind, by illegally, I am talking about a federal offense in the U.S. - like as in FBI, and multiple thousands of dollars, and PMITA prison time. I mean, they are serious about this stuff. And it's ridiculous.

Very few of us, as citizens, wish to break the law, or steal intellectual property. It just isn't really necessary when that product is made available at a reasonable cost for consumption and with reasonable fair use restrictions. But in the effort to maintain monopoly control over these bits, the corporate oligarchy is perfectly willing to put you in federal prison for watching a copy of King Kong that you paid full price to obtain. Or at least willing to threaten you with that consequence if you don't obey their unreasonable restrictions.

It's sad really. The information tehchnology at our fingertips is changing the way the world works. But the powers are doing their best to shackle that technology and prevent that change.

There isn't a non-political way to address the OP's question. At the most fundamental level, it is a political question. Yes, I said it: watching King Kong is a fundamentally political act. When you do it on a Linux box.

Read all of this, and start calling your regional bureacrats today:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/philosophy.html

And for fun:
http://eserver.org/Thoreau/civil1.html

"I HEARTILY ACCEPT the motto,—'That government is best which governs least'; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe,—'That government is best which governs not at all'; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.

-rcmiv

[briancurtin]

To me, simply disregarding the law so one can play a DVD, while appropriately Thoreau-ian (Thoreauvian? Thoreau-ish?), misses the importance of much larger issues.
whats a larger issue than me paying $18 for a DVD in the first place? on top of that, people want to say i cant watch it on my computer. its ********, and i will continue to do as i please.

[rcmiv]

whats a larger issue than me paying $18 for a DVD in the first place? on top of that, people want to say i cant watch it on my computer. its ********, and i will continue to do as i please.

Um, getting put in jail. Having your rights as guaranteed in the Constitution removed. Letting corporations like Microsoft lobby congress into passing legislation that makes it illegal to program your computer, or run any software unapproved by congress or Microsoft on it.

They already tell you which files you can legally access, how big of a stretch is it before Windows becomes legally mandated, to protect intellectual property?

Oh, and I completely agree with what you said. It is bs.

-rcmiv

[Stormy Eyes]

To me, simply disregarding the law so one can play a DVD, while appropriately Thoreau-ian (Thoreauvian? Thoreau-ish?), misses the importance of much larger issues.

Software patents, abuse of copyright, and the various intellectual property legislation efforts that are going on right now in the U.S. and Europe do not bode well for the personal freedoms of the citizens of those countries.

I got news for you: the majority is content to allow software patents, abuse of copyright, and intellectual property legislation. Frankly, if tyranny is that the majority wants, then tyranny is what they deserve.

[rcmiv]

I got news for you: the majority is content to allow software patents, abuse of copyright, and intellectual property legislation. Frankly, if tyranny is that the majority wants, then tyranny is what they deserve.

Sad but true Stormo. Sad but true.

-rcmiv

[localzuk]

Ah, I did misunderstand. I would love Ubuntu to stay completely free - although it currently isn't (eg. nvidia drivers).

To those who say 'people should use ogg's', I agree and disagree. If a person is making the move from Windows to Linux and they own a collection of mp3 files - it is far easier for them to simply be able to open them as is. Converting mp3 to ogg will result in the loss of quality which, IMO, is bad and could lead to people thinking 'ogg is a low quality crappy format' when it isn't. People *should* use ogg's but the practicality of converting a large mp3 collection is not going to get it to happen.

It shouldn't be too difficult to create a commercial plugin for a gpl player should it and allow it to be downloaded/purchased? One which worked with just one player would be better than nothing...

[vayu]

And keep in mind, by illegally, I am talking about a federal offense in the U.S. - like as in FBI, and multiple thousands of dollars, and PMITA prison time. I mean, they are serious about this stuff. And it's ridiculous.


What amazes me is that the penalties for electronic copying are ruthlessly greater than shoplifting the packaged product from a brick and mortar store.

[Stormy Eyes]

What amazes me is that the penalties for electronic copying are ruthlessly greater than shoplifting the packaged product from a brick and mortar store.

The reasoning is that since it's easier to copy electronically than to steal the physical product, the penalty has to be harsher. But try not to worry too much. This is America, and the government has a tendency to try to legislate morality. The sheeple will obey, and the real humans will ignore the law and treat the government with the contempt it richly deserves. It happened under Prohibition, it's happened during the War on Drugs, and it's happening now.

Never mind the needle and the box: the choice between conformity and self-rule is the real gom jabbar.