Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 29th Dec 2012 16:37 UTC
Linux It's sad that we need this, but alas - Matthew Garret has made a list of Linux distributions that boot on Windows 8 PCs with Secure Boot enabled. Tellingly enough, the list is short. Very short. Can someone hack this nonsense into oblivion please?
Thread beginning with comment 546593
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by kurkosdr
by Vanders on Sat 29th Dec 2012 18:41 UTC in reply to "Comment by kurkosdr"
Vanders
Member since:
2005-07-06

Or Linux distros can stop the "I am not including the workaround because I have moral objections" and get on with life.


Yeah, just roll over and get on with it. Don't complain. Microsoft surely know what they're doing and it's all for our own good. Why make a fuss?

We 've been through this before with libdvdcss. A working workaround exists and yet distros are not using it as to make a "statement".


Distributions do not omit libdvdcss (and codecs) to make a "statement", they omit it because it is illegal in several countries including the USA and the maintainers don't like the idea of possibly being arrested and charged should they go on a nice holiday to the USA one day in the future.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: Comment by kurkosdr
by kurkosdr on Sat 29th Dec 2012 20:29 in reply to "RE: Comment by kurkosdr"
kurkosdr Member since:
2011-04-11

Distributions do not omit libdvdcss (and codecs) to make a "statement", they omit it because it is illegal in several countries including the USA and the maintainers don't like the idea of possibly being arrested and charged should they go on a nice holiday to the USA one day in the future.


This is another "statement" that is particularly annoying. Not including something because it's illegal under the US and UK laws. See, most Linux distro maintainers are from the US or the UK, and seem to think the world must get shafted the same way they are, as to raise "awareness" for the problems their country has. Seriously, if some country like China bans cryptography (has happened before in more 'democratic' countries), what are the distro maintainers going to do? Remove all cryptography code from Linux, just so they don't get arrested if they ever visit China? Why is the US is more important than, say, China?

No fine folks, the omission of libdvdcss is either the result of a US-centric view of the world, or an effort by the maintainers to raise "awareness". In both cases, a "statement". There is no reason why there shouldn't be an "international" version of Ubuntu with full codecs and libdvdcss. Same for secure boot in most distros. It's all about "awareness". No legal hurdles this time. It's a "statement" again from stuborn maintainers.

BTW, the US authorities haven't issued an arrest warrant for the Mint guys yet...

And libdvdcss might not be exactly illegal in the US... http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/07/23/29099.htm

You do realize that libdvdcss is illegal in many parts of the world?

US, UK, maybe Germany, end-of-list. The Mint guys have no problem shipping it.

Yeah, just roll over and get on with it. Don't complain. Microsoft surely know what they're doing and it's all for our own good. Why make a fuss?

I complained, read my first post again about how secure boot sucks. The DRM in DVDs sucks even more. But what are you going to do? You can't "isolate" yourself from the problem by not supporting PCs with secure boot anymore, or by not having DVD playback. This is silly 70s thinking that has been passed by the FSF to many distro developers: See a problem? Isolate yourself from the problem by boycotting stuff. Don't try to workaround the problem. Unfortunately, most people don't think that way, so you are basically isolating yourself (and your distro) from the real world.

Edited 2012-12-29 20:38 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Comment by kurkosdr
by Neolander on Sat 29th Dec 2012 22:08 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kurkosdr"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

IIRC, Mint is a French distro, and things like libdvdcss and mp3 codecs are not yet illegal here. But I'm not sure about either.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by kurkosdr
by WereCatf on Sat 29th Dec 2012 23:51 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by kurkosdr"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Not including something because it's illegal under the US and UK laws. See, most Linux distro maintainers are from the US or the UK


Wait, what? You're saying they should just ignore the laws of the countries they live in and possible face severe consequences just to please you?

Seriously, if some country like China bans cryptography (has happened before in more 'democratic' countries), what are the distro maintainers going to do? Remove all cryptography code from Linux, just so they don't get arrested if they ever visit China?


Maybe. Or maybe they'd stop maintaining the distro. Or maybe something else. Whatever they chose as their course of action, however, is none of your business. If they face legal consequences then you have absolutely no right whatsoever to complain if they choose to protect themselves.

Why is the US is more important than, say, China?


Because, obviously, Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora et.al. are all aimed at the western civilizations. There are separate distros for the Chinese and for them China is more important.

There is no reason why there shouldn't be an "international" version of Ubuntu with full codecs and libdvdcss. Same for secure boot in most distros. It's all about "awareness".


No. One is about legality, the other is about ideology. You're comparing apples and oranges.

BTW, the US authorities haven't issued an arrest warrant for the Mint guys yet...


Are they based in the US? If not then that's a wholly irrelevant comment.

The Mint guys have no problem shipping it.


Indeed. Neither have VLC, for example. You know why? Because they originate from France.

Reply Parent Score: 5