To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I agree with liquidator, isn't there some sort of legal issue including proprietary codecs even if they are marked restricted?
I believe Feisty merely points you to a repository maintained in a country where there are, as yet, no legal issues (France or Hungary). Canonical does not redistribute the codecs. It is your responsibility to negotiate the legal grey area in the country you reside. I don't think I have a problem here in Canada. I don't think the Fraunhoffer Institute is going to track you down and prosecute you in the US.
I don't think the Fraunhoffer Institute is going to track you down and prosecute you in the US.
Probably not, but I wouldn't put it past Alcatel/Lucent, who just won $1.5 billion (with a B) from Microsoft because they only licensed MP3 from Fraunhoffer. Just about anyone can be taken to the cleaners for distributing software for consuming mainstream media, even if they think they acquired all of the necessary licenses.
Just face it: there's all this media out there, and nobody is allowed to consume it unless forms are filed in triplicate and stamped twice in the presence of a notary.
I could consume mainstream media, but when I can get my kicks and giggles watching some idiot doing something stupid on YouTube for free, why should I bother paying out the a** to get content I probably don't have the legal right to consume anyway? Or, more importantly, why should I give a damn if what I'm doing is illegal when enough sufficiently-priced lawyers can take me down regardless of my best intentions? We're all filthy criminals in the eyes of the content industry, and once a crook, always a crook.






Member since:
2006-05-22
With a creative audigy 2zs pro i only have sound every other time I boot...
I agree with liquidator, isn't there some sort of legal issue including proprietary codecs even if they are marked restricted?