Would you be willing for Ubuntu to have propietary codecs preinstalled(with license)?

[Mazza558]

What I mean is, if Canonical got licenses for proprietary codecs and other software, and preinstalled them for Ubuntul, would you still use it?

[Kingsley]

No, it would go against my religious philosophical ideology. I would immediately switch to Windows.

[Chilli Bob]

I'd happily pay a reasonable amount for an Ubuntu that includes licensed propriety codecs, but I would expect to also be able to obtain a free (speech and beer) version if I so preferred.

[fatality_uk]

No, it would go against my religious philosophical ideology. I would immediately switch to Windows.

:lolflag: 4 - 10

[BuffaloX]

I suppose it depends on circumstances.

I don't get all this proprietary format debate.
If I had a book written in some obscure code, would it be illegal for me to break the code and read it?
If I think it's funny to write a book using the same obscure code, now that I cracked it, would that be illegal?
To me it's all nonsense, unfortunately when money is involved everything suddenly get much more complicated.

Personally I sometimes need decoding of proprietary formats,
I always use open standards for encoding.

If it's possible to legally include the decoding part, without paying some LAME company, I'd much prefer that.

PS
LAME is cool. :)

[saulgoode]

I'd happily pay a reasonable amount for an Ubuntu that includes licensed propriety codecs, but I would expect to also be able to obtain a free (speech and beer) version if I so preferred.
A study performed in 2000 estimated that the cost of producing the 50 million lines of code that made up Debian, were it not being developed by volunteers, would be about $2,000,000,000. Assuming those numbers translate fairly closely over to Ubuntu, and taking into account inflation and a quadrupling of code size in the past eight years, its value should easily exceed $10 billion.

Of course, that's just for development of the source code. We should probably double that number (at least) in order to account for documentation and project administration. Oh, and capitol outlay costs as well -- we shouldn't expect our developers to have to buy their own machines so let's add another five billion on, bringing the grand total up to roughly $25,000,000,000.

If all, let's say, 10 million Ubuntu users decided to happily start paying for an Ubuntu produced in a manner befitting proprietary software, each user's share would only be about $2,500 dollars.

Sound reasonable? Or were you thinking that the makers of proprietary codecs were the only ones who should expect to be paid for their work?

[Chilli Bob]

A study performed in 2000 estimated that the cost of producing the 50 million lines of code that made up Debian, were it not being developed by volunteers, would be about $2,000,000,000. Assuming those numbers translate fairly closely over to Ubuntu, and taking into account inflation and a quadrupling of code size in the past eight years, its value should easily exceed $10 billion.

Of course, that's just for development of the source code. We should probably double that number (at least) in order to account for documentation and project administration. Oh, and capitol outlay costs as well -- we shouldn't expect our developers to have to buy their own machines so let's add another five billion on, bringing the grand total up to roughly $25,000,000,000.

If all, let's say, 10 million Ubuntu users decided to happily start paying for an Ubuntu produced in a manner befitting proprietary software, each user's share would only be about $2,500 dollars.

Sound reasonable? Or were you thinking that the makers of proprietary codecs were the only ones who should expect to be paid for their work?

What?? How does that relate to the topic?? You have missed the point completely.

What I am saying is that I would think it reasonable if users of Ubuntu could play DVDs without being in some legal grey area. I have downloaded the codecs for DVD decoding, as well as Flash, MP3, Shockwave and who knows what else, and quite honestly I have no idea how legal these are. Automatix gives a big red warning saying that the DVD codecs at least are illegal in the states. Why not have a version where licence fees (what.. a couple of bucks at most?) are paid where necessary and the codecs installed by default? If nothing else, it would be of benefit to Windows converts who have neither the knowledge or inclination to find and install those codecs themselves. ( I mean, seriously, have you ever tried installing shockwave?)

And in answer to your question, yes, I do think that the makers of proprietary codecs are the only ones who should expect to be paid for their work. Why would anyone volunteering their efforts to Debian or Ubuntu expect to be paid? That's what volunteer means!!!

[hanzomon4]

I'd have no problems with it. I don't have problems with the situation now, so....

[p_quarles]

A study performed in 2000 estimated that the cost of producing the 50 million lines of code that made up Debian, were it not being developed by volunteers, would be about $2,000,000,000.
Only a fraction of the 50 million lines of code in Debian were put there by Debian community developers. It's a fantastic distro, but it doesn't deserve that much credit.

I'm constantly surprised at how many people are unaware of this: Many GNU/Linux developers are paid programmers who work for big companies like IBM, Novell, Red Hat, Sun, Google . . . the list goes on. And yes, they get paid to develop GNU/Linux code. I'm quite confident that much more than US$2 billion has been poured into various OSS projects over the years.

Wasn't sure how to answer the poll, so I voted "other." I basically agree with chili bob that it wouldn't be a big deal if they offered a paid/licensed version as an alternative to the free distro. I might even buy it. But, Shuttleworth has said there will never be a "premium" Ubuntu, and I would definitely feel a twinge of disappointment if he went back on that.

[aysiu]

I voted I'd switch to another distro. Free Software is preferred.

Not because I'm a Free software fanatic but because I believe in living up to your beliefs. Canonical has said from Ubuntu's inception that it is committed to Free software. If it suddenly started including proprietary software, that would go against everything it was created to be. I don't like the idea of it changing midstream.

On the other hand, I have no problems with PCLinuxOS or Mepis including all that stuff, as that's what they've always done. They've never claimed to include only free software.