Kubuntu annoyances (check list)

[Edulix]

You don't need to ship with nonfree libraries, you can always ship with easy 
support for them as I described and as Firefox, remaining totally free and 
libre, does. Besides, ubuntu is not only for countries where software patents 
or DMCA exist, which are a minority. And certainly, there's no need to pay 
for those libraries I have installed which you can download from xine website 
for 0cents.

I'm sure that there are a lot of users with libraries installed that violate 
the license of the software, but that was their decision. I see more 
important providing easy access for those who can legally install them than 
preventing the first ones to do what they know is illegal (given that the 
wizzard puts it clear). That's actually what TCPA/Palladium is about (but 
implemented in hardware, and I as a user certainly don't like being 
controlled like that.

El Martes, 11 de Abril de 2006 00:41, Bry Melvin escribió:
> The "nonfree"libraries are always an issue. I am sure many are using them
> illegally. Many more with licenses with other commnercial software are in a
> grey area (using the codecs on their Dual boot setup or in a VM)  In other
> words those with valid win licenses etc.
>
> However I really don't think putting them in the standard installation is
> the answer. It makes things questionable. Ubuntu is supposed to be a
> totally free distribution. In order to do this it would seem there needs to
> be a paid/free version split. Which is exactly what ubuntu seaks to NOT do.
>
> There have been reports that Linspire's paid access to codecs etc may be
> available in the future for Ubuntu. I think this woud be the most logical
> answer.
>
> Linspire is not free, but gives access to install codecs etc AND even the
> commercial software to run windows on linux.(Crossover)
>
> I Don't think patents are going to go away soon.
> Ubuntu has shown that they are pursing the commercial market with the
> recent DB2 cert.
> I use ubuntu servers now having migrated from OS/2. I actually don't care
> about the restricted libraries, they are more in the area of a consumer
> user.
>
> To add these in with a bunch of install caveats is not going to be a good
> thing for commercial users, who then pay Canonical for support contract,
> which in turn pays for all the "free" users. the way the current installs
> are set up a commercial user can use a default install, and be sure that
> she's not installing anything illegal or of questionable nature (unless SCO
> wins anyway)
>
> Pushing for an available paid add on service like "click and run" from
> Linsire for Ubuntu would make a lot more sense. When you pay for this
> service, you are paying for the rights to use the patented technologies.
> Thus ends the question where you are legal or not.
>
> Bryann