Re: Linux, DVD's and GPLv3

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Malcolm, Jul 28, 2007.

  1. Malcolm

    Malcolm Guest

    On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:01:15 +1200
    sam <> wrote:

    > Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > > "sam" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > >>> Just how do Linux users legally play MPEG2 encoded data (used in
    > >>> DVD's) without an accompanying licence to do so? Do they
    > >>> individually sign an agreement with MPEG LA allowing them to make
    > >>> use of patented IP to ensure they aren't in breach? And just what
    > >>> are the implications of entering into such licensing agreements
    > >>> under GPLv3?
    > >>>
    > >>> http://www.mpegla.com/m2/
    > >>
    > >> Good question
    > >> What is the situation if you use VLC on a Windows OS instead of
    > >> Linux ?

    > >
    > > Answered here:
    > > http://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_about_personal..2Fcommercial_usage.3F
    > >
    > >
    > > In commercial software packages (such as the bundled Windows DVD
    > > player, PowerDVD etc) the producer has arranged the licence and has
    > > paid the associated fee, so the user does not have to be concerned
    > > with making special arrangements. In the case of open source
    > > software however, the software producer has not licensed the
    > > software, so it becomes the users responsibility to ensure that
    > > they arrange such a licence by contacting MPEG LA (the group holder
    > > of the applicable patents) if they wish to make use of MPEG2
    > > encoded data (such as DVD's).

    >
    > So the issue isn't specific to Linux users.
    > You shills from Microsoft NZ aren't ab$1.52 billionove telling a few
    > fibs when you are doing your anonymous trolling, are you ?

    Hi
    Didn't I read in stuff.co.nz that Microsoft have to pay up $1.52 billion
    for this....??

    Lucent filed suit against the software vendor on March 28 in a U.S.
    District Court in San Diego. The networking company, which currently is
    in the process of merging with Alcatel SA, said Microsoft has violated
    a patent it holds in the built-in MPEG-2 decoding capability of the
    console. At issue is patent 5,227,878, "Adaptive Coding and Decoding of
    Frames and Fields of Video."

    http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/04/14/77458_HNlucentxbox_1.html

    Now as an ex Alcatel employee and still a shareholder in said
    company.... where is my money... ;-)

    --
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
    SLED 10.0 SP1 x86_64 Kernel 2.6.16.46-0.14-smp
    up 3 days 5:31, 2 users, load average: 0.06, 0.08, 0.02
    Malcolm, Jul 28, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Malcolm

    Malcolm Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:16:53 -0500
    Malcolm <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:01:15 +1200
    > sam <> wrote:
    >
    > > Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > > > "sam" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > >> Mickey Mouse wrote:
    > > >>> Just how do Linux users legally play MPEG2 encoded data (used
    > > >>> in DVD's) without an accompanying licence to do so? Do they
    > > >>> individually sign an agreement with MPEG LA allowing them to
    > > >>> make use of patented IP to ensure they aren't in breach? And
    > > >>> just what are the implications of entering into such licensing
    > > >>> agreements under GPLv3?
    > > >>>
    > > >>> http://www.mpegla.com/m2/
    > > >>
    > > >> Good question
    > > >> What is the situation if you use VLC on a Windows OS instead of
    > > >> Linux ?
    > > >
    > > > Answered here:
    > > > http://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_about_personal.2Fcommercial_usage.3F
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > In commercial software packages (such as the bundled Windows DVD
    > > > player, PowerDVD etc) the producer has arranged the licence and
    > > > has paid the associated fee, so the user does not have to be
    > > > concerned with making special arrangements. In the case of open
    > > > source software however, the software producer has not licensed
    > > > the software, so it becomes the users responsibility to ensure
    > > > that they arrange such a licence by contacting MPEG LA (the group
    > > > holder of the applicable patents) if they wish to make use of
    > > > MPEG2 encoded data (such as DVD's).

    > >
    > > So the issue isn't specific to Linux users.
    > > You shills from Microsoft NZ aren't ab$1.52 billionove telling a few
    > > fibs when you are doing your anonymous trolling, are you ?

    > Hi
    > Didn't I read in stuff.co.nz that Microsoft have to pay up $1.52
    > billion for this....??
    >
    > Lucent filed suit against the software vendor on March 28 in a U.S.
    > District Court in San Diego. The networking company, which currently
    > is in the process of merging with Alcatel SA, said Microsoft has
    > violated a patent it holds in the built-in MPEG-2 decoding capability
    > of the console. At issue is patent 5,227,878, "Adaptive Coding and
    > Decoding of Frames and Fields of Video."
    >
    > http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/04/14/77458_HNlucentxbox_1.html
    >
    > Now as an ex Alcatel employee and still a shareholder in said
    > company.... where is my money... ;-)
    >

    Oh and this one as well...sigh

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061122-8272.html

    --
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
    SLED 10.0 SP1 x86_64 Kernel 2.6.16.46-0.14-smp
    up 3 days 5:39, 2 users, load average: 0.04, 0.08, 0.02
    Malcolm, Jul 28, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Malcolm

    sam Guest

    Malcolm wrote:
    > On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:01:15 +1200
    > sam <> wrote:
    >
    >> Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >>> "sam" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Mickey Mouse wrote:
    >>>>> Just how do Linux users legally play MPEG2 encoded data (used in
    >>>>> DVD's) without an accompanying licence to do so? Do they
    >>>>> individually sign an agreement with MPEG LA allowing them to make
    >>>>> use of patented IP to ensure they aren't in breach? And just what
    >>>>> are the implications of entering into such licensing agreements
    >>>>> under GPLv3?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://www.mpegla.com/m2/
    >>>> Good question
    >>>> What is the situation if you use VLC on a Windows OS instead of
    >>>> Linux ?
    >>> Answered here:
    >>> http://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_about_personal.2Fcommercial_usage.3F
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> In commercial software packages (such as the bundled Windows DVD
    >>> player, PowerDVD etc) the producer has arranged the licence and has
    >>> paid the associated fee, so the user does not have to be concerned
    >>> with making special arrangements. In the case of open source
    >>> software however, the software producer has not licensed the
    >>> software, so it becomes the users responsibility to ensure that
    >>> they arrange such a licence by contacting MPEG LA (the group holder
    >>> of the applicable patents) if they wish to make use of MPEG2
    >>> encoded data (such as DVD's).

    >> So the issue isn't specific to Linux users.
    >> You shills from Microsoft NZ aren't ab$1.52 billionove telling a few
    >> fibs when you are doing your anonymous trolling, are you ?

    > Hi
    > Didn't I read in stuff.co.nz that Microsoft have to pay up $1.52 billion
    > for this....??
    >
    > Lucent filed suit against the software vendor on March 28 in a U.S.
    > District Court in San Diego. The networking company, which currently is
    > in the process of merging with Alcatel SA, said Microsoft has violated
    > a patent it holds in the built-in MPEG-2 decoding capability of the
    > console. At issue is patent 5,227,878, "Adaptive Coding and Decoding of
    > Frames and Fields of Video."
    >
    > http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/04/14/77458_HNlucentxbox_1.html
    >
    > Now as an ex Alcatel employee and still a shareholder in said
    > company.... where is my money... ;-)
    >


    So does this licensing organisation want me to pay $US2.50 for using VLC
    on Windows ?
    Because I'm ready to, Paypal, CC whatever, to not have to use the
    commercial crap that came with my DVD drive.
    And that includes Windows Media Player, what a load of shite that is !!
    How about I pay another $2.50 for Media Player Classic ?
    Get Bill on the phone Mickey ! tell him I want a $2.50 refund on the
    shite bundled with XP !!
    sam, Jul 28, 2007
    #3
  4. In message <46aac7c3$>, sam wrote:

    > So does this licensing organisation want me to pay $US2.50 for using VLC
    > on Windows ?
    > Because I'm ready to, Paypal, CC whatever, to not have to use the
    > commercial crap that came with my DVD drive.


    Unfortunately, that won't be enough for them. They don't just want money for
    the patent royalties, they also want you to sign an ironclad agreement to
    ensure that nothing can happen to Hollywood's precious content without
    Hollywood's agreement.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jul 28, 2007
    #4
  5. Malcolm

    sam Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <46aac7c3$>, sam wrote:
    >
    >> So does this licensing organisation want me to pay $US2.50 for using VLC
    >> on Windows ?
    >> Because I'm ready to, Paypal, CC whatever, to not have to use the
    >> commercial crap that came with my DVD drive.

    >
    > Unfortunately, that won't be enough for them. They don't just want money for
    > the patent royalties, they also want you to sign an ironclad agreement to
    > ensure that nothing can happen to Hollywood's precious content without
    > Hollywood's agreement.


    Indeed, because those licensed players enforce region lockout which is a
    violation of free trade and competition law principles.
    It is virtually a moral duty NOT to use them.
    :)
    sam, Jul 28, 2007
    #5
  6. Malcolm

    Mickey Mouse Guest

    "Malcolm" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Didn't I read in stuff.co.nz that Microsoft have to pay up $1.52 billion
    > for this....??
    >
    > Now as an ex Alcatel employee and still a shareholder in said
    > company.... where is my money... ;-)


    Well it looks like the MP3 case was overturned, so no bonus dividend sorry.

    "A week after Microsoft was ordered to hand over $1.5 billion in an
    Alcatel-Lucent MP3 patent dispute, a federal judge has ruled that the
    Windows maker did not violate a patent at the heart of a second trial that
    was set to begin soon."

    http://news.com.com/Microsoft wins in second Alcatel-Lucent patent suit/2100-1014_3-6163828.html
    Mickey Mouse, Jul 28, 2007
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jonathan Walker

    Microsoft cites GPLv3 Legal Concerns

    Jonathan Walker, Jul 7, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    337
    Jonathan Walker
    Jul 7, 2007
  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Microsoft Snared by GPLv3

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jul 13, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    272
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Jul 13, 2007
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Re: Microsoft Snared by GPLv3

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jul 13, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    664
    Bruce Sinclair
    Aug 20, 2007
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Linux, DVD's and GPLv3

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jul 28, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    113
    Views:
    1,887
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Aug 6, 2007
  5. Mickey Mouse
    Replies:
    31
    Views:
    1,035
Loading...

Share This Page