On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 15:57 -0700, Francis Earl wrote: > Yes, despite it's legal ramifications... far better to risk your company > to appease users. It's not like it's not available for Fedora, but Red > Hat doesn't risk the future of the company on it. > > Google for 'Microsoft billion mp3' > > Mark is rich, but that's about 3 times his worth right there... he isn't > licensing MP3 or any other codec for his distro, Microsoft just licensed > it from the wrong people. > > Now wonder consider ffmpeg for instance has Apple codecs, mpg2/4 and > Microsoft codecs just to name a few, and ask yourself whether it's smart > to distribute this stuff. > > Only reason he gets away with it is because Ubuntu represents such a low > market share that it's not worth it today. AFAIK he doesn't "distribute" it (for some meaning of "distribute"), just makes it easy to get. I may be wrong (and I've no interest in arguing about it), but I think the Fedora rationale for not doing the same thing has more to do with avoiding lockin than avoiding lawsuits. poc > On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 18:08 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 14:29 -0700, Francis Earl wrote: > > > The only real benefits of Ubuntu are proprietary drivers by default, and > > > easier access to patent encumbered codecs... catering to users so much > > > is why Ubuntu is so popular... no other reason. > > > > How dare they offer something that users want :-) > > > > poc > > > -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
