Weekly Edition
Return to the Front pageSponsored link
Vyatta –
Linux & Open Source
Alternative to Cisco –
Advanced Routing,
Firewall, VPN, QoS..
Free Download ->
| |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
Fedora and MP3
The Linux world hears relatively little from Eric Raymond these days, a
fact which maybe bothers some people more than others. Be that as it may, Eric recently
broke his silence, in classic form, on the
Fedora-devel list. It seems that Eric has come to save the Fedora
distribution and set it back onto the path of Total World Domination.
There are a few small details that Eric would like to see fixed, including the FC5 artwork ("...backgrounds that look like a Teletubby hocked loogies into a dish full of soap scum."). But the real issue is in a different area: media support - DVD playback, Java applets, Flash media, and, especially:
For a consumer OS to be unable to play MP3s and handle podcasts is
just plain not acceptable, not in the world after iTunes.
The problem, of course, is that MP3 is a patented format. Since Fedora is, by design, a 100% free distribution, it is unable to include patent-encumbered software. So no MP3 format in Fedora. Adding MP3 support to an installed Fedora Core system is not a particularly difficult task for somebody who knows where to look (or how to ask a search engine), but it does require some extra steps. Red Hat's lawyers do not even allow Fedora (or its web sites) to even include a pointer to where this software can be found for fear of "contributory infringement" charges. As a result, adding MP3 support is too hard for many desktop users, especially home desktop users. One option might be to get a distribution license for the GStreamer MP3 plugin. With such a license, Fedora could ship a fully licensed MP3 decoder, with BSD-licensed source. There remain issues with just how that plugin could be shipped with certain GPL-licensed players, but the real problem is elsewhere: a Fedora distribution with this plugin would no longer be redistributable by others. It would, in other words, no longer be a 100% free distribution. Another option would be to put together some sort of third-party, repository with a carefully-chosen set of Fedora additions, a few of which just happen to include MP3 support. Said repository would naturally be hosted in a carefully-chosen country. Fedora could come with instructions for configuring the system to use that repository as a source of "useful extra software," with no mention of what is to be found there. Such a scheme might be vague enough to make the lawyers relax - though they have not made their feelings known on the matter. Yet another approach would be for Eric to make his own, MP3-enabled Fedora offshoot distribution - call it Fully-Armed Fedora or some such. Eric, however, has declined that opportunity, saying:
I don't have the money or the lawyers to pull it off. This sort of thing
is why we have commercial partners with office buildings.
What is really being called for here, in other words, is for Red Hat to stick its neck out and take the legal risk that comes with providing easy MP3 capability to Fedora users. Red Hat is understandably reluctant to do that. The company's relatively high profile and significant cash pile (around $800 million) make it a more likely lawsuit target than many others. Red Hat management probably sees much risk and little benefit in inviting lawsuits by including MP3 support, directly or indirectly. Eric's claim is that companies like Red Hat need to make a business decision to solve the MP3 problem in one way or another, even if it means making deals with patent trolls or shipping proprietary software. A Linux desktop which cannot deal with MP3 files is simply too crippled to be taken seriously by a large portion of the potential user base. If Fedora is ever to succeed in that market, it must do what the target users want it to do. There is a point here. Using Ogg for one's CD collection is no sacrifice, especially if one's portable player (running Rockbox, say) also supports that format. But there is an increasing amount of interesting content on the net which is only available in the MP3 encoding. All of that content is inaccessible using a stock Fedora Core system. That is, indeed, an unacceptable situation for many users. Solutions must be approached carefully, however. Future systems are likely to present other problems: DRM-encoded video formats, broadcast flags, locked-down computers which only run officially-signed software, and more. Any solution which does not also offer at least some hope of addressing those issues will not get us very far. So, in other words, to properly solve the MP3 problem, we must (1) continue working to encourage the creation of content in free formats, and (2) face the legal issues which are at the root of these problems. Those goals will not be helped much by bolting proprietary or otherwise encumbered software onto our free systems. Meanwhile, some other issues may be amenable to easier solutions. To that end, Warren Togami has announced the creation of a new mailing list for the discussion of artwork for future Fedora Core releases. Fedora Core 6 still won't play MP3 files, but maybe it can look a little nicer. (Log in to post comments)
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 2:48 UTC (Thu) by jmorris42 (subscriber, #2203) [Link] While it is true that long term solutions are needed lest things grow much worse, TCPA being the big bogieman, there is also Eric's totally valid point that we have a problem NOW.
If Debian can have an unfree repository, and tell people it exists, why can't Fedora? I brought up a similar point regarding unfree repositories and, not being ESR, was ignored. It isn't just the (very real) legal fears with Fedora, it appears they want to be more Catholic than the Pope and more RMS pure than Debian. MP3 is a real risk considering their cash pile, pointing at deCSS for DVD playback would almost certainly provoke a lawsuit. I'll give em those. But what is their justification for refusing to permit the official existence of a repo with closed device drivers, Flash, Acrobat Reader, etc. Macromedia even has a yum repo for flash, so there isn't ANY legal reasons for not pointing at it, only political or tactical reasons. Unless RedHat would have us to believe they live in fear that Macromedia would have both the stones AND the mental defect to sue for pointing to a URL they publish for the explicit purpose of easing installation of their product.
It wouldn't be quite as bad if they hadn't already pulled the 'secret legal problems' excuse with mono only to reverse course without explanation. One gets the impression RedHat plays the legal threat card for unrelated business reasons, such as keeping Fedora just hard enough to get up and running to discourage potential RHEL customers from using it in the case of unfree software and not wanting to aggrandize Novell in the case of mono and reversing when it was clear they were only harming themselves.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 5:11 UTC (Thu) by wtogami (subscriber, #32325) [Link] > It wouldn't be quite as bad if they hadn't already pulled> the 'secret legal problems' excuse with mono only to reverse > course without explanation.
http://gregdek.livejournal.com/4008.html
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 7, 2006 17:29 UTC (Fri) by ametlwn (subscriber, #10544) [Link] If Debian can have an unfree repository, and tell people it exists, why can't Fedora?The analogy is flawed. Debian non-free contains stuff that is not released under a DFSG free license but that we believe to be able to distribute without legal troubles. It is not Debian/warez. Afaik RedHat OTOH is not distributing MP3 software (either in Fedora or as part of the non-existing Fedora/non-free) because they think they might get into trouble.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 10, 2006 18:54 UTC (Mon) by jmorris42 (subscriber, #2203) [Link] > It is not Debian/warez.
I take it you didn't actually read my post. If Macromedia is publishing a yum repository then it really takes a disturbed mind to connect telling people about that URL with 'warez'. I don't even think the most extreme lawyer at the MPAA would do want to try that one.
I granted that MP3 support is dodgy in the US, even just pointing to a non-US repo and probably even if it had a notice explaing the patent situation and recommending it only for folks in jurisdictions where there aren't any legal issues. My point was their carrying a supportable position far into la-la land where pointing people looking for a flash plugin to Macromedia's own yum repo is a non-starter.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 2:54 UTC (Thu) by yodermk (subscriber, #3803) [Link] Fedora is *not supposed* to be a distribution for the masses and, IMHO, promoting it is if it were is just asking for trouble. FC5 on my work computer (a fairly new desktop with an Intel motherboard) only does video with the VESA driver and I still have not gotten sound to work (even though it detects the onboard chip). I tried to give FC4 to a couple friends and both had trouble. (One is now happily using Ubuntu, the other's computer is simply messed up and doesn't even run 'Doze reliably.) Anyone who uses Fedora needs to know how to dig through forums and howto repositories.
I think the solution for "the masses," at the moment, is unfortunately for-pay distributions such as Linspire. They can do everything legally and have some income to hopefully put together a solid product that will work right on most hardware.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 5:15 UTC (Thu) by loening (subscriber, #174) [Link] I gotta second you here, and I think it points out that ESR's whole premise is wrong. Fedora, at least in its present incarnation, is never going to take over the world with or without MP3.
I've been a Redhat/Fedora user since the Redhat 4.2 days, and as much as it breaks my heart to say so, there's no way I would recommend Fedora for a casual user. Fedora is simply Redhat's Beta program for RHEL, and you really can't expect much more. It's pretty sweet when things work, and I love being on the cutting edge of things. But when things go wrong it's never a simple point and click to fix things. If anyone wants to prove me otherwise, I've got one word for you: SELinux. Whether you like it or not, maintaining a system running SELinux is a whole extra level of complexity over the already overly complicated task of running a Linux system.
I would love it if Redhat had a stripped down version of RHEL that was cheap and appropriate for the consumer. Your standard consumer doesn't ever want to reinstall the OS, so the 5-year upgrade cycle is key. But from what I can tell, Redhat is simply not interested in the consumer desktop world. The support burden's higher then business workstations/desktops, and the price people are willing to pay is to low. I think Redhat and Fedora have both conceded the consumer desktop market for the conceivable future.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 7:33 UTC (Thu) by tomsi (subscriber, #2306) [Link] I would love it if Redhat had a stripped down version of RHEL that was cheap and appropriate for the consumer. I second that. I have been playing around with CentOS 4 (as well as Scientific Linux 4) and find it predictable and stable, which is what a lot of people want. It is a bit boring as it is Gnome 2.8 / KDE 3.2, though. Tom
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 16:16 UTC (Thu) by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033) [Link] Thirded. Would recommend Scientific Linux or Centos for anyone wanting a free tracker of red Hat Enterprise Linux.
The name "Scientific Linux" may be offputting. It's called that because it's produced by people at CERN and Fermilab, but in fact it's a pretty good linux for anyone who wants free (as in beer), easy-to-use, and Redhat-alikeness. Apart from a group of optional additional packages, there's nothing science-specific in there. It's a perfectly fine linux for anyone who wants Redhat flavour but doesn't want to pay. You have the backing of a large scientific community, so its unlikely that any showstopper bugs would be lift unfixed for long.
BTW I have managed smooth upgrades from Fedora 1 and 2 to Scientific Linux and Centos using the "linux upgradeany" option. The only post-upgrade hassle was that yum needed to be fixed, by installing the sl-release or centos-release rpm (using --force) and then uninstalling fedora-release. YMMV, have not tried escaping from FC3, 4 or 5 yet.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 18, 2006 13:20 UTC (Tue) by quintesse (subscriber, #14569) [Link] SELinux: I have 3 words "turn it off"
Really now, SELinux is not for the casual user and just like I won't let my mother install Windows on her system herself I won't let her install Linux herself either. Using it though is a whole different game though, I'm pretty sure she wouldn't even know the difference.
The problem is not those casual users and the problem is not the expert users either. It's those in between, the ones that know enough to start fiddling with their system but not enough to do so on Linux.
But even so, the Linux experience has improved immensely and you can do a lot of "fiddling" without ever having to resort to arcane shell commands and the like.
And have you lately installed a Windows system? And have you done so looking at it from the point of view of a non-expert? Because when I last did it and tried to do it "according the book", installing Windows and then inserting driver disks and such, I got left with an unstable system filled with shitty 3rd party drivers (this included ones from renowed brands as nVidia, nothing wrong with the Gfx drivers, but the nForce stuff just sucks).
I also have this Philips Webcam which has no XP drivers (and according to tech support there never will be because it's an old model) which is a bitch to get to work on Windows (and if it works it will leave the system unstable, which is to be expected with unofficial drivers and such). On Linux? It just works. No drivers to install, nothing.
Does this mean I think Linux is as good or better as Windows in all aspects? Of course not, there are still a lot of things that could be improved, I just think there are a lot of situations where even casual users can benefit from using Linux.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 4:02 UTC (Thu) by dang (subscriber, #310) [Link] I'm a bit baffled here.
From the perspective of promoting open source, I think redhat's decision is as correct. If mp3 licensing is restrictive, and if there are ( better ) open source alternatives like ogg, then bite the bullet. In many ways, the problem here isn't with ogg, it is that you can't play oggs on your ipod, or you can't buy oggs from your favorite vendor. This bullet biting strategy is consistent with linux kernel's bulet biting stragegy with respect to binary drivers in general ( esp with respect to graphics cards and wireless cards ). There are compatibility issues, they suck, but the right answer is push back on vendors.
On the other hand, for the perspective of the end user, if you really need to access media that fedora doesn't support, it takes one quick google search to find out which repos you need to add to your yum repository list. Simpler than the steps that you'd need to go through if you wanted a binary driver for your graphics card, etc.
So I don't really have a problem with distros both doing the right thing, doing it as a matter of policy, and not weasling about it. For users that are interested in free beer, there are trivial answers. And this isn't news. Redhat hasn't shipped mp3 support in a long while.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 4:09 UTC (Thu) by hppnq (guest, #14462) [Link] I still think RedHat is right, albeit in a bit cowardly fashion.The whole world could be massively using proprietary, closed formats and the problems associated with them would still exist. The choice is between giving in to the fact that (it appears) we cannot live without them, or keep trying to offer a free alternative. I am very glad that a major distribution still has a keen eye for the principles of Free Software. I would say that in this podcasting age there is even *more* reason to worry about the non-existence of an effective, legally unencumbered way of accessing data stored in non-free formats than before.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 18, 2006 13:24 UTC (Tue) by quintesse (subscriber, #14569) [Link] I'm curious as to the how and the why RedHat can be right in a "cowardly fashion"?
Unbalanced Reporting Posted Apr 6, 2006 4:35 UTC (Thu) by wtogami (subscriber, #32325) [Link] Respectfully, in my opinion this article is unbalanced in not stating the other side of this story and giving too much credibilty to ESR due to his "celebrity" status.
Being one of the Red Hat engineers who criticized ESR for his dishonesty in this particular fedora-devel-list flamewar I am probably not best to summarize these matters, but I provide here some posts that demonstrate unbalanced reporting in this article. I hope that LWN can do better in the future.
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2006-Ap...
It is my personal opinion that ESR is acting dishonest, recklessly in some kind of misguided crusade that is destructive to our community's long term interests.
When he responded to mail in this flamewar, it seemed like he missed obvious points entirely and chose not to respond to particularly difficult questions. Later in this flamewar when the community largely turned against him, he became even more unreasonable and illogical and in some places whiney. This is the kind of behavior that I would expect out of kindergartener, not a full grown adult and "leader" of a global socio-economic movement. Very puzzling to me.
Warren Togami
(DISCLAIMER: Views expressed here are those of solely myself and not necessarily my employer.)
Unbalanced Reporting Posted Apr 6, 2006 5:23 UTC (Thu) by wtogami (subscriber, #32325) [Link] On second thought, the original article was not quite as unbalanced as I thought. I apologize. Keep up the good work.
ESR outside agitator, not leader Posted Apr 6, 2006 9:16 UTC (Thu) by bkoz (guest, #4027) [Link] I take issue with the idea of describing ESR as a leader.
He's a commentator, and occasional agitator By his own definition, he's not a contributor, at least a regular contributor.
Leadership to me implies a willingness to deal with the details, and a commitment to take a long-term position within a community while working towards a common goal.
Drive-by postings on a development list don't count, at least to me.
ESR outside agitator, not leader Posted Apr 6, 2006 23:29 UTC (Thu) by wcooley (subscriber, #1233) [Link] Yeah, it's time we let the dead parrot die.
ESR Drive-By Flamewars Posted Apr 7, 2006 1:35 UTC (Fri) by gstein (guest, #3612) [Link] The Subversion development community has been subject to Eric's drive-by flames, too. On several occasions. At least one of those times, we had to send Eric email off-list to ask him to stop posting and leave. By that point, everybody had flipped the bozo bit and begun ignoring him entirely. Thus, his continued rants were merely sucking energy from the community with zero potential for any positive outcome.
Since this has happened several times at Subversion, and now I learn with Fedora, too, I can only conclude this is Eric's "typical" pattern of interaction with communities nowadays. Unfortunately, it is rather uncool, disrespectful, and unbecoming of him.
"a horrible, elitist attitude thast will lose us the market-share war" Posted Apr 6, 2006 6:51 UTC (Thu) by olov (subscriber, #21416) [Link] Is it just me or did anyone else find this a bit funny?
"a horrible, elitist attitude thast will lose us the market-share war" Posted Apr 6, 2006 7:29 UTC (Thu) by marineam (subscriber, #28387) [Link] /me wasn't aware that we were at war ;-)
Each distro serves a purpose, and Fedora's is probably general purpose workstations, not random novice users. There are other distros for those people and they *gasp* already have mp3 support.
Fedora 5 look Posted Apr 6, 2006 9:09 UTC (Thu) by frazier (subscriber, #3060) [Link] RMS:backgrounds that look like a Teletubby hocked loogies into a dish full of soap scumIf it looks like the screenshots here, well, judge for yourself. Looks like they let the graphic artist have fun to me.
Fedora 5 look Posted Apr 6, 2006 9:23 UTC (Thu) by frazier (subscriber, #3060) [Link] Not sure how "ESR:" came out of my head as "RMS:" above but it did and was an error!
I'd edit the problem, but LWN doesn't allow that. Guess it keeps people honest. In this case, me saying, uh, I goofed!
Sorry.
-Brock
Fedora 5 look Posted Apr 6, 2006 15:49 UTC (Thu) by scripter (subscriber, #2654) [Link] I rather like the artwork for FC5... it's refreshing and enjoyable. Keep it up!
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 13:01 UTC (Thu) by ll (subscriber, #4404) [Link] I don't understand why the line is drawn at MP3. I assume Fedora can't play most of the media formats that Windows and Mac users take for granted, like Quicktime or Windows Media. Some band-aid solution that works for MP3s won't solve the big problem: most multimedia distributed today uses patent-encumbered, closed formats.
RMS discussed this at the GPLv3 launch Posted Apr 6, 2006 15:00 UTC (Thu) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] http://www.ifso.ie/documents/gplv3-launch-2006-01-16.html#rms-gstreamer-example
RMS discussed this at the GPLv3 launch Posted Apr 6, 2006 16:39 UTC (Thu) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] RMS should have stated the issue more clearly. The software in question is free software for those who live in a jurisdiction where software patents are not valid. The patent license gives permission to others, and as to whether there is a conflict with the GPL, IANAL (there's a conflict if the patent grant doesn't apply to derivative works, if I understand correctly). While I respect RMS's stance, it seems to me that the Fluendo folks who negotiated this deal are trying to help, and I think it would be reasonable for Fedora and other distros to include it.
RMS discussed this at the GPLv3 launch Posted Apr 6, 2006 21:41 UTC (Thu) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] I'd cut him a little slack since that pronouncement was an unplanned interuption of a presentation by someone else, but yes, the patent licence could not render the software non-free in a jurisdiction which doesn't have legal software patenting.
The other thing is that I haven't read Fluendo's patent licence, and I would be surprised if it did allow distribution as free software - so that criticism might need checking.
If the patent grant doesn't apply to derivative works, then that's not good. That means buyers of Fluendo's product are ok, but when the execute their redistribution rights they are putting the recipient in a danger which they themselves have decided is unbearable.
Where to draw the line is clear Posted Apr 7, 2006 1:58 UTC (Fri) by wtogami (subscriber, #32325) [Link] If you get a legally binding, written, perpetual, and irrevocable royalty free grant for any Free and Open Source Software to use a particular patent, then it is compatible with the GPL and legal in all jurisdictions. Anything less than such a written promise is probably not compatible with the GPL and feasible for Fedora.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 6, 2006 17:02 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] It seems to me that Red Hat shouldn't necessarily include the Fluendo plug-in, but they could certainly point people at it. Surely the lawyers wouldn't have any problem with Red Hat telling people to get a properly-licensed piece of software, and GPL-compatibility-issues don't matter for end users, who don't need a license to the GPLed work (and this is an important aspect of the GPL: Freedom 0 implies that the user must be permitted to run GStreamer to play MP3s).
Jon lets his opinion show just a bit Posted Apr 6, 2006 18:02 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link] call it Fully-Armed Fedora or some such.:-)
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 7, 2006 19:35 UTC (Fri) by job (subscriber, #670) [Link] Eric has always been acting like a selfish kid, ever since he hijacked the Hacker's Dictionary and stuffed it full of his own vocabulary. In his world he's probably a real hacker, in the real world nobody cares.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 9, 2006 22:53 UTC (Sun) by grouch (subscriber, #27289) [Link] Ever used Mozilla or Firefox?
Let's not forget that ESR has contributed in ways beyond fetchmail.
Fedora and MP3 Posted Apr 13, 2006 7:28 UTC (Thu) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link] What has he contributed to those?
Netscape, and "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" Posted Apr 13, 2006 12:00 UTC (Thu) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link] ESR was the one (to hear him tell it anyway, and I believe it's agreed hewas indeed influential) who convinced Netscape to open their source, and start what became the Mozilla project.
FWIW, with The Cathedral and the Bazaar, and the essays that followed from
ESR is quite the controversial person, and many believe the reception he
Duncan
Netscape, and "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" Posted Apr 13, 2006 21:11 UTC (Thu) by rqosa (guest, #24136) [Link] > ESR was the one (to hear him tell it anyway, and I believe it's agreed he was indeed influential) who convinced Netscape to open their source, and start what became the Mozilla project. Except that the current Mozilla codebase was rewritten from scratch.
Patents, Fedora, and MP3 Posted Apr 13, 2006 12:22 UTC (Thu) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link] I always find it frustrating when reading articles discussing patents suchas the MP3 patent, when the expiration isn't noted. Unlike copyrights, patents actually /do/ expire within one's lifetime, and too often, they are discussed as if they don't. Obviously, a shorter than 20 year period would be better for software patents, if they are to be granted at all. Perhaps 5 years. However, 20 years remains a whole lot better than the practically infinite period now granted to copyright.
As it happens, according to Wikipedia, there's a series of patents claimed
In any case, it seems that early on, LAME became one of the more popular
Of course, after MP3, it'll be other issues, Treacherous Computing and
Duncan
|
|||||||||||