Winston Graeme schrieb:
[...]
I would see it as quite enoying to say the least if
I
as a new Linux user finally start up my system ...
all
great open-source software ... & all eager I throw
in
a DVD & start up the player and I'm told that I'll
have to pay in order to watch my DVD....so much for
open-source.
Couldn't there be a link in a Player which points
to
site which is hosted in a country where codecs can
legally be downloaded ?
Or as said above ... Novell pays money .. & the
user
has no hassle .. or is this against policy ?
Sorry but I really don't get it why this is all so
difficult when Novell is a huge global company.
when the discussion starts here on the list, I've
had agreed totaly
with you. I have written about my surprise after
paing for the
boxed 9.3-pro-version (btw - my first steps with
linux at all !)
and my try to play my owen MP3, and my owen DVD. and
my
surprise at the homepage where I was told to get
more info about
it as it says that Novell doesn't know any legal way
to get a player
for my needs.
but the last 1 1/2 days I have read a lot of the
needed stuff when
it came to the points of copyright, license and
patents, and how it
can be all into a legal way ( I can only speak about
the situation
in germany and a little about it in the EU, not for
the hole world ;) )
1. linking to a site where illegal content will be
offert is against german
law. it doesn#t matter if the link is on a website,
as hyperlink in
software or printed out in manuals or books.
2. offering codecs for downloading is not per se
illegal - it depends
on the technic the codec was made / how the
structure of the data for
reading / writing was get by the author of the
software.
3. it depends on the owner of a format // patent //
license if a decoder
and / or encoder that is not published by the owner
is legal or illegal.
4. if a decoder or encoder is just for reading oder
writting "pure data"
and it is not used to have a copyprotection into
that data (MP3) it is very
difficult to be on a legal way when a author
programs such a decoder
or encoder. there are too many "if"s, "when"s and
"else"s to make things
clear on a short basis - you even could fill books
with it !
5. when there is a technic used to protect "pure
data" againt copying
(CSS with DVSs for example) it is against german law
to produce
a software that reads the "pure data" by cracking
that copyprotection,
and it is against the law to make any link to sites
that offer those
software.
6. even when a site like openSUSE.org is not hosted
in germany and
the site itself is out of business of german law,
but it is a german
business or has a german office witch offers here
business for the
coperation in germany it has to delete all links to
sites that offers
that software - so there will be never a legal way
to put links into
the wiki or any other site thats owned ny Novell.
conclusion:
there is only one legal way for Novell and the boxed
version of
SUSE Linux: they have to get the arcording license,
pay the feed
for it, and a) put that feed up on the prise of the
box or b) make
a better box with a big sighn on it that all legal
licenses are included
without any higher price.
for the OSS-version of openSUSE I can't see a way
that is realistic.
first: the needed software should be also OSS
because all in that
version will be. how many will that cost to get the
license, and
how realistic will it be that wthis will be done ?
second. it could be closed software. thats againt
OSS, but will
get a better price when they have to pay the
licence. when they
give out that piece of software for free they have a
little more
"freedom" with the comunity, but are still against
OSS. when
they sale that piece of software - no freedom, still
against OSS,
and not many of the comunity will by that.
btw: even when you can get the sourcecode of the
tools for scampling
CSS "all over the net" (when you look for it, of
cource) there will
be never a day where the DVDforum, holder of the
patents and copyrights
of CSS, will allow to make a OSS-version of those
software. thats a
dream, not more. that could only be done with closed
software. but as
holder of the rights of those software you can do
with what you like -
even make it free for all. the onyl thing: you have
to pay for it as holder
of the rights.
so, to came to an end here:
I understand that Novell has to make some secision
that are not easy,
and they have to make good calculations, and asking
themself where
they want to go (ups, that was from microsoft I
think ...). but I'm
wondering why the hell they are thinking now, and
didn't done that
2 oder 3 years ago.
thanks for audience,
with regards
JBScout