a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
114 messages Options
1234 ... 6
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most media
players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for this,
because this might block a lot of non-techie user using SuSE (after all
RealPlayer is not the default player in SuSE). Maybe I am doing
something stupid (I am only a one year old SuSE user after all, and not
a community organization expert) but I wish to call SuSE user and
developer's attention to this issue so that:

     I. as a best solution, motivate opensuse to enable mp3 by default
        on bmp, xmms, banshee, rhymbox, gstreamer (including totem) and
        all players;
    II. as a fall back solution, let's collect solutions on how to
        enalbe mp3 on various players and make sure end users can easily
        find these solution, and these solutions are not too complex.
        These solutions must make their way on the web so that users can
        find them very easily, things appear in second google search
        result won't be a lot helpful for users. (I knew there are
        already a lot of "solutions" but they are often either not easy
        to find or doesn't work. Check my ealier post.)
   III. if OpenSuSE decide not to enable mp3 support because it's not
        "Free" by GNU definition, at least we can try to submit some
        patches and make these patchs gets into opensuse so that when a
        music play failed to play mp3, it prompts with some
        user-friendly message that you need to look up this and that
        webpage for solutions on how to enable mp3 support.

I myself am still looking for solution to enable mp3 on either Banshee
or Rthymbox. Looks so far Banshee it's easiler to find a solution for
Banshee. I am still working on it.

Study shows not every "ordinary users" actually use google to search for
a solution when they got a problem. So if people have to search for how
to enable mp3, we already know many people has given up. And also study
shows even in opensource world, only 1/7 people go ask questions on
forum or mailing list. So if a google search doesn't leads to a workable
solution, 6/7 people perhaps give up, only 1/7 will post something like
me. Well perhaps only a very few percent will have a true hacker's
spirit and hack down a solution when questions on forum/lists doesn't
get a solution.

P.S. I read some forum threads saying SuSE Enterprise Linux Desktop have
mp3 enabled by default. Is this ture? If so I'd like to try it and
recommend other people to use that one in place of opensuse provide it's
not too expensive for most users.

P.S. "If it's not working, source is there and why not work it out
yourself?" Well, I'd be glad to hack the source to solve it myself IF
THE MUSIC PLAYER don't support MP3 NATIVELY. But the mp3 problem we are
facing is already solved by all Linux music players, the situation is
music players support mp3, SuSE removed it. So this is a non-technical
issue.

Sorry for bad English!

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

M Harris-2
On Saturday 27 January 2007 20:20, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most media
> players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for this
        As we sometimes say in America, "You're preaching to the choir".

        ... we are getting upset for this also...   :-))

        <sign>

        But my friend, it isn't going to change any time soon.









--
Kind regards,

M Harris     <><
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

John Andersen
In reply to this post by Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
On Saturday 27 January 2007, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> Study shows not every "ordinary users" actually use google to search for
> a solution when they got a problem. So if people have to search for how
> to enable mp3, we already know many people has given up. And also study
> shows even in opensource world, only 1/7 people go ask questions on
> forum or mailing list. So if a google search doesn't leads to a workable
> solution, 6/7 people perhaps give up, only 1/7 will post something like
> me. Well perhaps only a very few percent will have a true hacker's
> spirit and hack down a solution when questions on forum/lists doesn't
> get a solution.


I would like NOVELL to publish an exact and complete and CONSOLIDATED
change log of every package they intentionally cripple in their quest to
appease the lawyers, and the methods used to cripple these packages.

Further, since the patent holders of mp3 state on their web page that you
DO NOT NEED A LICENSE for home use I would like Novell to make
available repositories that are FREE but never included in their boxed
sets which overcome and reverse all crippling.

Reference:
http://www.mp3licensing.com/help/index.html

QUOTE:
 "
However, no license is needed for private, non-commercial activities
(e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a
personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration
of any kind or for entities with associated annual gross revenue less than
US$ 100 000.00.

Since OPENSUSE does not GENERATE any revenue and has to be funded
by NOVELL in order to survive it seems to fit this definition.

--
_____________________________________
John Andersen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Charles R. Buchanan
In reply to this post by M Harris-2

On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 21:28:27 -0600, M Harris <[hidden email]> took time to say the following:

(^_^)On Saturday 27 January 2007 20:20, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
(^_^)> As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most media
(^_^)> players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for this
(^_^) As we sometimes say in America, "You're preaching to the choir".
(^_^)
(^_^) ... we are getting upset for this also...   :-))
(^_^)
(^_^) <sign>
(^_^)
(^_^) But my friend, it isn't going to change any time soon.

You mean to tell me that I won't be able to play mp3 files unless I use
Real PITA?



Too many people spend money they haven't earned to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like.
-Will Rogers

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
In reply to this post by M Harris-2
在 2007-01-27六的 21:28 -0600,M Harris写道:

> On Saturday 27 January 2007 20:20, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> > As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most media
> > players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for this
> As we sometimes say in America, "You're preaching to the choir".
>
> ... we are getting upset for this also...   :-))
>
> <sign>
>
> But my friend, it isn't going to change any time soon.

I believe you already know how important this issue is, this issue
itself can lead a lot of user goes to Ubuntu and a lot other
distributions, leaving OpenSuSE as Novell's little expensive toy. I
myself once found it difficult to support SuSE users will not like to
recommend other 'ordinary people' use SuSE. And a lot of non-technie
Linux users are supported by other friendly Linux users like me.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Marcus Meissner
In reply to this post by John Andersen
On Sat, Jan 27, 2007 at 06:53:38PM -0900, John Andersen wrote:

> On Saturday 27 January 2007, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> > Study shows not every "ordinary users" actually use google to search for
> > a solution when they got a problem. So if people have to search for how
> > to enable mp3, we already know many people has given up. And also study
> > shows even in opensource world, only 1/7 people go ask questions on
> > forum or mailing list. So if a google search doesn't leads to a workable
> > solution, 6/7 people perhaps give up, only 1/7 will post something like
> > me. Well perhaps only a very few percent will have a true hacker's
> > spirit and hack down a solution when questions on forum/lists doesn't
> > get a solution.
>
>
> I would like NOVELL to publish an exact and complete and CONSOLIDATED
> change log of every package they intentionally cripple in their quest to
> appease the lawyers, and the methods used to cripple these packages.
>
> Further, since the patent holders of mp3 state on their web page that you
> DO NOT NEED A LICENSE for home use I would like Novell to make
> available repositories that are FREE but never included in their boxed
> sets which overcome and reverse all crippling.
>
> Reference:
> http://www.mp3licensing.com/help/index.html
>
> QUOTE:
>  "
> However, no license is needed for private, non-commercial activities
> (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a
> personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration
> of any kind or for entities with associated annual gross revenue less than
> US$ 100 000.00.

First ... Try reading and understanding the whole page.

The heading of your quoted part is:
"4) Do I need a license to stream mp3, mp3PRO or mp3surround encoded
content over the Internet?"

So it is just about _content_ not about _software_.

The page does clarify MP3 decoding software only in point (1):
1) Do you license mp3, mp3PRO and mp3surround software to end users?
   No. We license mp3/mp3PRO software and patents to developers and
   manufacturers of software applications and hardware devices.

So there is need for a license for _all_ mp3 software under conditions
not specified on this page.

CIao, Marcus
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Marcus Meissner
> > Further, since the patent holders of mp3 state on their web page that you
> > DO NOT NEED A LICENSE for home use I would like Novell to make
> > available repositories that are FREE but never included in their boxed
> > sets which overcome and reverse all crippling.
> >
> > Reference:
> > http://www.mp3licensing.com/help/index.html
> >
> > QUOTE:
> >  "
> > However, no license is needed for private, non-commercial activities
> > (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a
> > personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration
> > of any kind or for entities with associated annual gross revenue less than
> > US$ 100 000.00.
>
> First ... Try reading and understanding the whole page.
>
> The heading of your quoted part is:
> "4) Do I need a license to stream mp3, mp3PRO or mp3surround encoded
> content over the Internet?"
>
> So it is just about _content_ not about _software_.
>
> The page does clarify MP3 decoding software only in point (1):
> 1) Do you license mp3, mp3PRO and mp3surround software to end users?
>    No. We license mp3/mp3PRO software and patents to developers and
>    manufacturers of software applications and hardware devices.
>
> So there is need for a license for _all_ mp3 software under conditions
> not specified on this page.

And its clarified on http://www.mp3licensing.com/help/developers.html:

I want to support mp3, mp3PRO or mp3surround in my products. Do I need a license?
Yes. [....]

What does it cost?
A per unit royalty is taken on mp3/mp3PRO products and applications,
such as ripping software, jukebox applications, mp3/mp3PRO-enabled
CD/DVD players and portable mp3/mp3PRO players.

Read "per unit royalty". And that we make openSUSE available as download
makes this not easier.


In the end ... such things need to be clarified and cross checked by
lawyers, and ours did check it, rest assured of that.

Ciao, Marcus (not a lawyer, not qualified to give legal advice, not speaking
for Novell, only for himself)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Bugzilla from andjoh@rydsbo.net
In reply to this post by Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
On Sunday 28 January 2007 08:42, Zhang Weiwu wrote:

> 在 2007-01-27六的 21:28 -0600,M Harris写道:
>
> > On Saturday 27 January 2007 20:20, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> > > As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most
> > > media players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for
> > > this
> >
> > As we sometimes say in America, "You're preaching to the choir".
> >
> > ... we are getting upset for this also...   :-))
> >
> > <sign>
> >
> > But my friend, it isn't going to change any time soon.
>
> I believe you already know how important this issue is, this issue
> itself can lead a lot of user goes to Ubuntu and a lot other
> distributions,

If people are willing to break the law with Ubuntu, they can do so in SUSE as
well. All the packages you need are available at packman.links2linux.org. But
the law being what it is, it's just not legal to distribute, not for SUSE,
not for Ubuntu, not for anyone. The only thing legal to distribute are
licensed players, and for that, there is RealPlayer/Helix

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Bugzilla from andjoh@rydsbo.net
In reply to this post by John Andersen
On Sunday 28 January 2007 04:53, John Andersen wrote:
> Further, since the patent holders of mp3 state on their web page that you
> DO NOT NEED A LICENSE for home use I would like Novell to make
> available repositories that are FREE but never included in their boxed
> sets which overcome and reverse all crippling.

But such a repository would be illegal, since it qualifies as distribution.

Packman is a repository made by home users for home users. With the current
legal situation, I suspect it's as close as you will get

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

jdd@dodin.org
Anders Johansson wrote:

> Packman is a repository made by home users for home users. With the current
> legal situation, I suspect it's as close as you will get
>

all this is true.

However, the situation is changing in facts.

the rising of more and more web sites like myspace or youtube that
spreads all over the world music and videos, on a completely illegal
maner, it's right, makes it very difficult now to ask for mp3 privacy.

Not than this can change the Novells position, but if the above web
sites are not sued and closed very soon (and I don't see this likely
to happen), the mp3 contenders will have a very difficult position.

may be Google will be stronger than Novell :-)) (Google is now the
owner of myspace and youtube)

jdd

--
http://www.dodin.net
Votez pour nous, merci - vote for us, thanks :-)
http://musique.sfrjeunestalents.fr/artiste/Magic-Alliance/
http://photo.sfrjeunestalents.fr/artiste/jddphoto/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from andjoh@rydsbo.net
在 2007-01-28日的 10:54 +0100,Anders Johansson写道:

> On Sunday 28 January 2007 08:42, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> > 在 2007-01-27六的 21:28 -0600,M Harris写道:
> >
> > > On Saturday 27 January 2007 20:20, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> > > > As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most
> > > > media players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for
> > > > this
> > >
> > > As we sometimes say in America, "You're preaching to the choir".
> > >
> > > ... we are getting upset for this also...   :-))
> > >
> > > <sign>
> > >
> > > But my friend, it isn't going to change any time soon.
> >
> > I believe you already know how important this issue is, this issue
> > itself can lead a lot of user goes to Ubuntu and a lot other
> > distributions,
>
> If people are willing to break the law with Ubuntu, they can do so in SUSE as
> well. All the packages you need are available at packman.links2linux.org. But
> the law being what it is, it's just not legal to distribute, not for SUSE,
> not for Ubuntu, not for anyone.

* Rhymbox is not able to play mp3, as far as I know no package in packman can help that
* BMP which rely on gstreamer cannot play mp3. I still don't know any
package on packman can help (please correct me, help greatly appreiated
because I started searching several days agao)
* Totem cannot play mp3 which also rely on gstreamer, non of packman's
package can help
* XMMS cannot play mp3 and non of packman's package can help.
* Banshee is not able to play mp3 and the only package can help is
helix, which is not found on packman, nor on official repository.

There are all solutions to the problems listed above, all of them
require commandline skill (several solutions that do not require
commandline skill, like installing gstream-mad and gstream-ugly, tested
not working for me).

The only package I know that plays mp3 thanks to packman is MPlayer.
 

> The only thing legal to distribute are
> licensed players, and for that, there is RealPlayer/Helix

how do we interprate the fact Helix is removed from non-oss section? (it
was there.) As far as I know it's perfectly legal to distribute this
package. Current situation: Helix is not existing in official
repository, not in SuSE Guru, not in Packman. (This page shows I am not
the only person confused on why Helix is removed.
http://www.suseforums.net/index.php?showtopic=28227
 But glad to know at least it's not removed from SuSE Enterprise Linux
Desktop, in which Helix-banshee is installed by default)


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
In reply to this post by Marcus Meissner
在 2007-01-28日的 10:35 +0100,Marcus Meissner写道:

> Ciao, Marcus (not a lawyer, not qualified to give legal advice, not speaking
> for Novell, only for himself)

     1. is it possible to negociate for a special license for SuSE? Did
        we tried that? If there is a per unit royalty how did realplayer
        get their license when number of user is not clear? Would a
        public petition work?
     2. is it possible to move helix-banshee to default OpenSuSE
        installation? Which as far as I can guess have no legal concern
     3. is it possible us the community work up and provide some package
        in packman to solve this problem, as we did on MPlayer? (maybe
        provide a package serve as gstreamer plug-in)

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Marcus Meissner
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 06:35:31PM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:

> 在 2007-01-28日的 10:35 +0100,Marcus Meissner写道:
>
> > Ciao, Marcus (not a lawyer, not qualified to give legal advice, not speaking
> > for Novell, only for himself)
>
>      1. is it possible to negociate for a special license for SuSE? Did
>         we tried that? If there is a per unit royalty how did realplayer
>         get their license when number of user is not clear? Would a
>         public petition work?
>      2. is it possible to move helix-banshee to default OpenSuSE
>         installation? Which as far as I can guess have no legal concern

I can try to bring this up, and you could too in a openSUSE status meeting.

>      3. is it possible us the community work up and provide some package
>         in packman to solve this problem, as we did on MPlayer? (maybe
>         provide a package serve as gstreamer plug-in)

packman could perhaps provide a gstreamer-plugin-mp3 package or so.
(I do not know gstreamer sufficiently to be sure if it is that easy.)

Ciao, MArcus
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Bugzilla from andjoh@rydsbo.net
In reply to this post by Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
On Sunday 28 January 2007 11:23, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> * Rhymbox is not able to play mp3, as far as I know no package in packman
> can help that

No idea

> * BMP which rely on gstreamer cannot play mp3. I still don't
> know any package on packman can help (please correct me, help greatly
> appreiated because I started searching several days agao)

http://packman.links2linux.de/package/bmp

Install and play

> * Totem cannot play mp3 which also rely on gstreamer, non of packman's
> package can help

Wrong

http://packman.links2linux.de/package/totem

plus

http://packman.links2linux.de/package/xine-lib

can play it perfectly well

> * XMMS cannot play mp3 and non of packman's package can help.

How about
http://packman.links2linux.de/package/xmms

> * Banshee is not able to play mp3 and the only package can help is
> helix, which is not found on packman, nor on official repository.

 Ihave no idea about this, why this was removed. Someone else will have to
answer this one

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Carlos E. R.-2
In reply to this post by Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


The Sunday 2007-01-28 at 18:23 +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:

> * XMMS cannot play mp3 and non of packman's package can help.

Use beep-media-player from packman, instead:

Description :
Beep Media Player (BMP) is a GTK2 port of the popular X Multimedia
System (XMMS) and more.

> The only package I know that plays mp3 thanks to packman is MPlayer.

Amarok from suse plays them fine with the non-suse xine engine .

- --
Cheers,
       Carlos E. R.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76

iD8DBQFFvIDJtTMYHG2NR9URApW7AKCGdpsconkKNIX/SH4gUW8X4DBcuQCfQYZy
Pjex8A2MeMnnx/yQFeVAF0c=
=rmFE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

ken-8
In reply to this post by Zhang Weiwu, Beijing
I use "mpg321 file.mpg".

Suse 9.3


On 01/27/2007 09:20 PM somebody named Zhang Weiwu wrote:

> As I recently discovered it is not very easy to enable mp3 on most media
> players of OpenSuSE (except RealPlayer). I am getting upset for this,
> because this might block a lot of non-techie user using SuSE (after all
> RealPlayer is not the default player in SuSE). Maybe I am doing
> something stupid (I am only a one year old SuSE user after all, and not
> a community organization expert) but I wish to call SuSE user and
> developer's attention to this issue so that:
>
>      I. as a best solution, motivate opensuse to enable mp3 by default
>         on bmp, xmms, banshee, rhymbox, gstreamer (including totem) and
>         all players;
>     II. as a fall back solution, let's collect solutions on how to
>         enalbe mp3 on various players and make sure end users can easily
>         find these solution, and these solutions are not too complex.
>         These solutions must make their way on the web so that users can
>         find them very easily, things appear in second google search
>         result won't be a lot helpful for users. (I knew there are
>         already a lot of "solutions" but they are often either not easy
>         to find or doesn't work. Check my ealier post.)
>    III. if OpenSuSE decide not to enable mp3 support because it's not
>         "Free" by GNU definition, at least we can try to submit some
>         patches and make these patchs gets into opensuse so that when a
>         music play failed to play mp3, it prompts with some
>         user-friendly message that you need to look up this and that
>         webpage for solutions on how to enable mp3 support.
>
> I myself am still looking for solution to enable mp3 on either Banshee
> or Rthymbox. Looks so far Banshee it's easiler to find a solution for
> Banshee. I am still working on it.
>
> Study shows not every "ordinary users" actually use google to search for
> a solution when they got a problem. So if people have to search for how
> to enable mp3, we already know many people has given up. And also study
> shows even in opensource world, only 1/7 people go ask questions on
> forum or mailing list. So if a google search doesn't leads to a workable
> solution, 6/7 people perhaps give up, only 1/7 will post something like
> me. Well perhaps only a very few percent will have a true hacker's
> spirit and hack down a solution when questions on forum/lists doesn't
> get a solution.
>
> P.S. I read some forum threads saying SuSE Enterprise Linux Desktop have
> mp3 enabled by default. Is this ture? If so I'd like to try it and
> recommend other people to use that one in place of opensuse provide it's
> not too expensive for most users.
>
> P.S. "If it's not working, source is there and why not work it out
> yourself?" Well, I'd be glad to hack the source to solve it myself IF
> THE MUSIC PLAYER don't support MP3 NATIVELY. But the mp3 problem we are
> facing is already solved by all Linux music players, the situation is
> music players support mp3, SuSE removed it. So this is a non-technical
> issue.
>
> Sorry for bad English!
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

M. Fioretti
In reply to this post by jdd@dodin.org
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 11:06:31 AM +0100, jdd ([hidden email]) wrote:

> the rising of more and more web sites like myspace or youtube that
> spreads all over the world music and videos, on a completely illegal
> maner, it's right, makes it very difficult now to ask for mp3
> privacy.

No. Why do you say so? How music and video (="content") are spread and
licensed has _nothing_ to do with how the *software* to play them is
distributed and licensed. In both ways.

If all MP3 and MP4 codecs, algorithms, implementations, became GPL
tomorrow it would still be illegal to upload some Beatles album on a
public server for everybody to download. Regardless of the encoding
format.

If all Beatles albums became public domain tomorrow and were put in
MP3 format on a public server for everybody to download, it would
still be illegal for OpenSuse or any other Free SW distribution made
with the same criteria to be shipped and distributed with a fylly
working MP3 decoder.

> Not than this can change the Novells position, but if the above web
> sites are not sued and closed very soon (and I don't see this likely
> to happen), the mp3 contenders will have a very difficult position.

No again. This is like saying that, if an artist doesn't want to paid
for his or her music, this puts the makers of DVD players in a very
difficult position. These are two completely separate issues.

Ciao,
        Marco

--
The right way to make everybody love Free Standards and Free Software:
http://digifreedom.net/node/73
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

jdd@dodin.org
M. Fioretti wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 11:06:31 AM +0100, jdd ([hidden email]) wrote:
>
>> the rising of more and more web sites like myspace or youtube that
>> spreads all over the world music and videos, on a completely illegal
>> maner, it's right, makes it very difficult now to ask for mp3
>> privacy.
>
> No. Why do you say so? How music and video (="content") are spread and
> licensed has _nothing_ to do with how the *software* to play them is
> distributed and licensed. In both ways.

because what is played on these sites are mp3's and made by users. I
wonder if most of these users have a licence to _build_ mp3's

> No again. This is like saying that, if an artist doesn't want to paid
> for his or her music, this puts the makers of DVD players in a very
> difficult position. These are two completely separate issues.

I don't speak of content but of file format. how do you think the
uploaded files are made of?

jdd


--
http://www.dodin.net
Votez pour nous, merci - vote for us, thanks :-)
http://musique.sfrjeunestalents.fr/artiste/Magic-Alliance/
http://photo.sfrjeunestalents.fr/artiste/jddphoto/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

Mathias Homann
Am Sonntag, 28. Januar 2007 schrieb jdd:

> I don't speak of content but of file format. how do you think the
> uploaded files are made of?

So, the fact that loads of pirated ebooks on the web are in pdf format
makes adobe acrobat illegal?
(not to mention that ANY text editor would be illegal, because the
rest of those piraed ebooks is plaintext...)

bye,
        MH



--
gpg key fingerprint: 5F64 4C92 9B77 DE37 D184  C5F9 B013 44E7 27BD
763C
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: a user call for attention on SuSE's mp3 support issue

M. Fioretti
In reply to this post by jdd@dodin.org
On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 13:15:49 PM +0100, jdd ([hidden email]) wrote:

> M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> >No. Why do you say so? How music and video (="content") are spread
> >and licensed has _nothing_ to do with how the *software* to play
> >them is distributed and licensed. In both ways.
>
> because what is played on these sites are mp3's and made by users. I
> wonder if most of these users have a licence to _build_ mp3's

Exactly. If somebody creates some artistic "content" (for lack of a
better word) he or she:

* has all the rights to decide how it can be (re) distributed but this
* doesn't mean at all that that creator can decide without limits with
  which technological means this should happen

Example: you make your _own_ movie and want everybody in your town to
see it for free, all together at the same time. Nobody questions your
right to do so or the legality of your choice. But this doesn't enable
you to pry open the doors of the closest movie theaters, load your
movie in the projector and yell "everybody come in, it's free". Like
it or not, this is the current situation with codecs.

Check question "How is the MPEG-4 Visual Patent Portfolio License
organized?" at http://www.mpegla.com/m4v/m4v-faq.cfm

What it says in plain english is that if you put some MPEG4 DIY movie
of your own holidays on your own web page together with Google ads,
you *have* to pass some of that revenue as royalties to the
consortium.

> I don't speak of content but of file format. how do you think the
> uploaded files are made of?

Your original message made me think that you give for granted:

"I can distribute my own original  content as I please" equal to:
"I can do it with whatever software technology as I please".

This is not the case.

Ciao,
        Marco

--
The right way to make everybody love Free Standards and Free Software:
http://digifreedom.net/node/73
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

1234 ... 6