On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Francis Earl <lunitik@xxxxxxxxx> 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. > I don't know that making it easy to access qualifies as distribution. Ubuntu used to say on their home page that they only shipped free software(OSS) , has this changed or am I mistaken? Max -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
