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