Would you pay for legal codecs support via Linspire's CNR?

[Judland]

Linux, in every form and every distro is a step in the right direction.

Nope. I can't agree with you there.

I don't believe in the "victory at any cost" way of thinking. I still like to be able to look myself in the mirror at the end of the day.

[snarkout]

I take it you don't use any of the codecs then? It's an admirable goal, and one that might be worthwhile. However, using the codecs and dvdcss as you need but refusing to pay for them, citing philosophical reasons such as "free as in freedom" is a major logical fallicy. If you just don't give a rat's ass about laws outside your country, that's fine - I have no problem with that. You've been rattling your saber pretty loudly though, using phrases like "You're just giving up your freedom for convenience" and I really hope that means you *don't* use proprietary codecs.

[Judland]

Let's just say I ain't going to be extorted to use my PC the way I want to use it. I should have the freedom to do what I want with it not have to pay for a right that I should have in the first place.

How long will this situation last? I have no idea, but I'm going down swinging!

At the moment (and as far as I know the laws in effect) I'm not breaking any laws by ripping my CDs and DVDs for my own personal use.... called "fair use". That's why I'm paying taxes on every blank CDR and/or cassette tape I buy (and don't get me started on that topic )

I do use proprietary codecs, although I have made changes that reduces the frequency of such uses.... and I'm also learning more about the subject all of the time.

However, I do see a difference in these two situations:
1) Buying a DVD and ripping it to a format of my choosing for my own use; and
2) Buying a DVD and not having the right to use it as I see fit (for my own use) unless I pay a corporation for the right to do so and only under their terms.

Imagine if they sold bread the way they sold DVDs and CDs:

Well, you can toast this bread but only on one side. And you can put butter on it but only our brand of butter... otherwise you'll be in violation of the user agreement printed on the wrapper. Oh, and no blueberry jam. Our company doesn't make blueberry jam so you're not allowed to put it on our bread when you use it.

If it came down to the second situation, here in Canada, I guess I'd be going back to recording all of my movies off of the movie channel. And if that meant using my 1986 VCR that I bought before all of the decoding crap got put into them, then so be it.

It's all very personal. I can't say I'm prepared to go as far as RMS presently. Maybe someday... not right now, at least for me. But I've come a long way since my first exposure to F/OSS four years ago and I'm learning more. So there's hope

[Chess]

Let's just say I ain't going to be extorted to use my PC the way I want to use it. I should have the freedom to do what I want with it not have to pay for a right that I should have in the first place.

I haven't thought this through all the way, but I'll throw it out for discussion's sake: if I own a Sony DVD player that is connected to my TV with which I watch my DVD's, then aren't I paying for the right to watch the DVD's? Isn't there a hardware decoder (most likely a chip with a software decoder on it) contained within that DVD player? I actually don't know the answer to that question, but I'd be willing to bet there is. So it just occurred to me that, as things are today, we pay for the right to play our music/watch our DVD's all the time.

Suppose someone did not own a hardware DVD player and bought a DVD movie. How are they going to watch it -- as things stand today? If the options were to buy a Sony DVD player with the decoder built in, or, buy a software decoder to watch it on their computer, how are the two any different?

I suppose the next argument is that there should not be any copy protection on the DVD's at all and therefore no decoders at all, hardware or software, but that's a different slant on this issue, because theoretically then we should not buy DVD movies or hardware DVD players or mp3 players of any kind. That would involve Windows users not paying or using licensed software decoders that may ship with a Windows box, Windows users not buying iPods or any mp3 players, and everybody else not buying hardware DVD players. But with all that, it becomes something other than a Linux issue -- which is fine, and conceptually it's something I agree with, but then the Linspire announcement is really secondary. For me, I think I'd still want more people on "our side" (the Linux side) that can do whatever they can do in Windows vis-a-vis codecs, and then fight the general codec battle higher up the ladder, since it's a fight that would theoretically involve Windows, Mac, and Linux users as well as general consumers that buy Sony DVD players.

I don't know -- I'm just musing here.

[Judland]

I haven't thought this through all the way, but I'll throw it out for discussion's sake: if I own a Sony DVD player that is connected to my TV with which I watch my DVD's, then aren't I paying for the right to watch the DVD's? Isn't there a hardware decoder (most likely a chip with a software decoder on it) contained within that DVD player?

I'm not up to speed on the technical aspects of the whole thing either, but I'd say you're right there, Chess.

I suppose if I didn't have my DVD player (part of the stereo) and I wanted to watch a movie on DVD, I'd use my Linux box to watch it and/or record to my VCR, or something.

I guess that's one point I was trying (miserably I'll admit) to make. Once I buy that DVD, I should have the right to do something like this and not be breaking the law because I'm using Linux with a reversed engineered piece of software (or hell, even a piece of software I wrote myself) to access the DVD recording.

Fortunately, I do have that right.... for now.

[Gomer_X]

I take it you don't use any of the codecs then? It's an admirable goal, and one that might be worthwhile. However, using the codecs and dvdcss as you need but refusing to pay for them, citing philosophical reasons such as "free as in freedom" is a major logical fallicy. If you just don't give a rat's ass about laws outside your country, that's fine - I have no problem with that. You've been rattling your saber pretty loudly though, using phrases like "You're just giving up your freedom for convenience" and I really hope that means you *don't* use proprietary codecs.

I'm not convinced we're even legally obligated to pay for MP3 or DVD codecs. I was under the impression the makers of players were required to get licenses, not the end user.

If we ARE required to pay, I'll choose to disobey this unjust law. Our country was founded on the idea of disobeying unjust laws in order to obtain freedom. See "Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau. It is, of course, obligatory that you're willing to accept the penalty if you get caught breaking the law.

I also see paying for MP3 codecs and paying for Windows codecs to be completely different. I'm not giving money to Microsoft to encourage them to develop proprietary standards. I'll choose not to pay and not to use those formats.

[snarkout]

I take it you don't use any of the codecs then? It's an admirable goal, and one that might be worthwhile. However, using the codecs and dvdcss as you need but refusing to pay for them, citing philosophical reasons such as "free as in freedom" is a major logical fallicy. If you just don't give a rat's ass about laws outside your country, that's fine - I have no problem with that. You've been rattling your saber pretty loudly though, using phrases like "You're just giving up your freedom for convenience" and I really hope that means you *don't* use proprietary codecs.

I'm not convinced we're even legally obligated to pay for MP3 or DVD codecs. I was under the impression the makers of players were required to get licenses, not the end user.

If we ARE required to pay, I'll choose to disobey this unjust law. Our country was founded on the idea of disobeying unjust laws in order to obtain freedom. See "Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau. It is, of course, obligatory that you're willing to accept the penalty if you get caught breaking the law.

I also see paying for MP3 codecs and paying for Windows codecs to be completely different. I'm not giving money to Microsoft to encourage them to develop proprietary standards. I'll choose not to pay and not to use those formats.

I agree completely, and I do "break the law" daily by watching movies and listening to my mp3s. I'm not, however, on a soapbox about it. To me, decrying the atrocity of proprietary codecs, but still using them illegaly is no different than using pirated \/\/ar3z and saying you only do it to "free yourself from the shackles of opression."

I have an anti-mpaa and an anti-riaa on the back of my car, and anm strongly, strongly against the DMCA. I don't think using unlicensed codecs on linux makes me a freedom fighter though.

[Gomer_X]

I agree completely, and I do "break the law" daily by watching movies and listening to my mp3s. I'm not, however, on a soapbox about it. To me, decrying the atrocity of proprietary codecs, but still using them illegaly is no different than using pirated \/\/ar3z and saying you only do it to "free yourself from the shackles of opression."

I agree that using codecs without paying and using software without paying are the same.

I believe using software without paying is wrong, so I don't do it. It's a just law, so I will obey it.

I believe using MP3s and DVDs without paying for the codecs is not wrong, so I do it. I believe that a law saying I can't listen to MP3s without paying for codecs is unjust, so I disobey it.

I believe Microsoft has a legal right to patent and control their codecs, so I won't watch WMVs on Linux. It's a just law, so I obey it.

I'm just acting in accordance with my beliefs.

[CptnObvious999]

I try to stay away from wma and wmv's and rarely ever need to play them. But for other things I might pay for, however I don't think it is right to be locked into a format so I just do it the "shady way" for the most part though all my files are using a codec linux can legally play for free, (XviD, OGG, FLAC, MP3 (with the fluendo plugin of gstreamer). I would probly not pay for codecs however if I were to give it to my friends I might suggest they do. Linux supports enough codecs to make me happy and I havn't had to pay for any of them.

[snarkout]

I'm just acting in accordance with my beliefs.

That's reasonable. I probably shouldn't have posted in this thread at all, and especially not in a way challenging Judland's views - he has his own views, and have a good deal of respect for him, so I should respect his views. Especially when I agree with him for the most part. However, I also agree with those who say that in order for linux to get any real traction in the mainstream marketplace, it will need to play DVDs ad codecs out of the box. I think that there is no way in hell that's going to happen w/o some money passing from hand to hand. And personally I want to be able to use all of the codecs, including wma, wmv, quicktime, etc. Mp3 and dvd are absolutely essential to me.

[Judland]

That's reasonable. I probably shouldn't have posted in this thread at all, and especially not in a way challenging Judland's views - he has his own views, and have a good deal of respect for him, so I should respect his views. Especially when I agree with him for the most part. However, I also agree with those who say that in order for linux to get any real traction in the mainstream marketplace, it will need to play DVDs ad codecs out of the box. I think that there is no way in hell that's going to happen w/o some money passing from hand to hand. And personally I want to be able to use all of the codecs, including wma, wmv, quicktime, etc. Mp3 and dvd are absolutely essential to me.

Hey, man, that's what a discussion is all about.... expressing different points of view. I try not to take offense and I certainly didn't here. I just get over "enthusiastic" about my own opinion sometimes, that's all.

We all have our own opinion and we should have the right to express those, too, just as we should have the right to play our DVDs and CDs the way we damn well please.

So, as long as everyone is respected and the discussion stays civil, I say keep expressing those opinions.

One of the reasons I don't mind debating topics like this is that the arguments that come up force me to rethink why I feel the way I do about things. I learn a lot about the facts as well as what I really think about them. So, calling "bullshit" sometimes just makes me strengthen my point of view and even changes it once in a while.

This time, however, I'm still going to say paying for rights I should have in the first place is not the right thing to do.

[thetza]

If I can simply pay for a peice of paper saying I've legally paid for the right play these files, sure. If I have to install some closed source spyware on each of my machies, fuck it.