codec support

[Hubert Figuiere]

On Wednesday 02 August 2006 19:49, Darryl Moore wrote:
> yes, well those are just the ones I mean. I'm still not exactly sure
> about the status of w32codec though. I've seen some sites which insist
> they are a direct copy. Others which say they are not. Does source code
> exist somewhere? That would be definitive. If you have any good
> background on this I'd appreciate a link or two.

win32codecs are the Windows binary DLL (dynamic shared objects) copied 
verbatim. IMHO they represent a license violation of said package they have 
been extracted from.

> decss IS most definitely legal in canada. It is only the DMCA in the
> states which make it illegal.

And DADVSI in France as you can do jail time (up to 2 yrs) and be fined up to 
300,000 EUR for providing it. Remember CSS is the badly designed DRM by the 
DVD consortium to ensure their royalty flow (the US supreme court ruled out 
the need of a license) and for the region control enforcing (RPC-2 drives 
request the region checked before providing the CSS session keys. Libdecss 
interestingly overcome both limitations.

> MP3 is as well. At least if you don't believe in software patents which
> our patent office likes to be ambiguous about. Certainly the
> corporations have not proved their patents in THIS country.

The MP3 patent is a bit specific as AFAIK, is a bit kean on licensing for open 
source software decoding (it is not very clear but admitted that decoding 
with free software will no require licensing, but IANAL)

> DivX which I believe is part of the w32codec should be as well.

No DiVX is supported by ffmpeg (open source). It is also patent encumbered.

Ad of the legality in Canada, you'd better get a good lawyer. Most codec 
patent are void in Canada, but you might actually spend more in legal fees to 
prove that in court than just paying the licensing (that are *capped*, and on 
purpose).


Hub