5 ms·

If I understand the situation correctly, this is actually a rather heavy and unnoticed albatross hanging around Linux's neck: it's hard for a company to ship a

by scythe 10y ago

If I understand the situation correctly, this is actually a rather heavy and unnoticed albatross hanging around Linux's neck: it's hard for a company to ship a working Linux distribution on a laptop sold for profit, because "working" means implementing a number of patented features.

mjevans 10y ago
As well as likely distributing firmware which SHOULD just be shipped with the bloody hardware in a small sliver of ROM, or patches to roms which have bugs because of lack of testing, etc. Also many of the WiFi drivers have such crazy firmware because they're actually (at least partly) software defined radios and thus each country needs a slightly different flavor and that's related to regulations and testing. Everything would be much easier if we could just have some part of the UN that every country agrees to follow manage a universal spectrum allocation and anyone that disagrees should just expect all of the electronics to break.
- mseebach 10y ago
  No, things would be better if someone (not me, alas, with a nod to the Linus rant) would design, build and market a wifi chip with FOSS firmware. Software is great exactly because it allows for infinite flexibility, so you don't need to involve the UN when allocating wifi spectrum.
  - swiley 10y ago
    That would probably be illegal for unlicenced use. WiFi firmware the way it's written now is considered hardware (at least in the US) just like the parent of your comment said.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Other way round: you need to comply with the (national) spectrum allocation. I'm not sure it would be even possible to build a FOSS wifi device without infringing any patents. And, as with other OSHW, how much more are people prepared to pay for that open-ness? I suspect very little.
- ddebernardy 10y ago
  > Everything would be much easier if we could just have some part of the UN that every country agrees to follow manage a universal spectrum allocation and anyone that disagrees should just expect all of the electronics to break. Not sure it would be. As I understood that's more or less how it works today bar the UN bit. Key industry players chatter and come up with standards that all are reasonably happy with. But then throw in a few countries that want to do things differently just for the sake of it, prior spectrum allocation, and protectionist moves, and you end up where we are today... https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
- digi_owl 10y ago
  Err, yeah, good luck with that. Sad thing is that is is USA that is the problem child in all this. Being largely isolated from Eurasia, and having just a few big neighbors that are easy to convince to play along, they can basically define the spectrum within their broadcast reach as they see fit. It is basically the same reasoning behind it as why metric is still not the default over there.
  - zeveb 10y ago
    > Sad thing is that is is USA that is the problem child in all this. Being largely isolated from Eurasia, and having just a few big neighbors that are easy to convince to play along, they can basically define the spectrum within their broadcast reach as they see fit. Well, and that works in our situation. > It is basically the same reasoning behind it as why metric is still not the default over there. There's also the simple fact that the 'metric' system is just different, not superior in general (i.e., it's better at some things and worse in others). Why impose a bunch of costs for no net benefit? If every other country jumped off a bridge, ought we?
    - FireBeyond 10y ago
      What is the metric system worse at?
      - SamReidHughes 10y ago
        Dividing by 2 or 3. Having useful amounts of precision.
        FireBeyond 10y ago
        By 2? Because dividing 10 or 100 by 2 is harder than 12 by 2? Three, I'll give you. Useful amounts of precision is a nothing, if you ask me. We start teaching decimals in third grade, and the only real issue with decimals is weather, for which the difference is saying "80F vs 81F", or "26.7 versus 27.2", whose utility is ... limited. For distance, the metric system has finer grained units for precision (come on, break down inches: 1/16, 1/8, 3/16, 1/4, 5/16, 3/8, 1/2, etc... are you going to argue that is better than 25.7cm or 257mm?). I'm not really buying it, as someone who has lived in both worlds.
bubblethink 10y ago
In the US, yes. Ubuntu, VLC and the likes are exempt from this sort of nonsense because they are not registered in the US. I don't know what happens when a US based company like Dell sells laptops with Ubuntu in the US though. They probably would have made some deals.
- simonh 10y ago
  That's actually easier for a hardware vendor though because they charge money for the product so can factor in licensing costs. Even aside from free software principles, the problem faced by a distro like Fedora is fitting the square peg of paying licensing fees to patent holders through the round hole of providing their software as a free download. BTW, does anyone know if Canonical still pay licensing fees to cover Ubuntu for this sort of thing? I believe they used to.
- digi_owl 10y ago
  I seem to recall that when you install Ubuntu you have to specifically check a box to say you want the proprietary and patent encumbered stuff. Likely Dell leave that up to the user to install after unboxing. And that is one reason that Mint got popular, because they took Ubuntu and bundled that stuff right on the ISO.
  - jhasse 10y ago
    VLC is free software but still isn't included in Fedora because of patent issues. Ubuntu includes it (Ubuntu MATE even in the default install).
- TD-Linux 10y ago
  Being in the EU is not a magical bullet against software patents. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/blackberry-sues-nokia-over-patents-as-its-phone-business-shuts-down/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/blackberry-sues-...
lmm 10y ago
Any organization with a per-unit revenue stream can easily just pay the MPEG-LA etc. "reasonable and non-discriminatory" fees - they're pretty low. It's only a problem for people who want to distribute linux (or anything that plays music/videos, unless it's just a wrapper that reuses the OS's built-in decoders) completely for free.
- gcp 10y ago
  Which is why Chrome includes an MPEG-4 AVC/H264 decoder, but Chromium and Firefox do not.
  - vetinari 10y ago
    Firefox nowadays downloads a blob for decoding H.264, distributed by Cisco. Cisco pays the fees and they've hit the upper cap time ago anyway. The source for that blob is available, but legally the binary must be distributed by someone, who is paying the fees.
    - gcp 10y ago
      The blob does not decode anything besides Baseline profile. It won't decode any web video.

by scythe 10y ago

mjevans 10y ago

As well as likely distributing firmware which SHOULD just be shipped with the bloody hardware in a small sliver of ROM, or patches to roms which have bugs because of lack of testing, etc. Also many of the WiFi drivers have such crazy firmware because they're actually (at least partly) software defined radios and thus each country needs a slightly different flavor and that's related to regulations and testing. Everything would be much easier if we could just have some part of the UN that every country agrees to follow manage a universal spectrum allocation and anyone that disagrees should just expect all of the electronics to break.

mseebach 10y ago
No, things would be better if someone (not me, alas, with a nod to the Linus rant) would design, build and market a wifi chip with FOSS firmware. Software is great exactly because it allows for infinite flexibility, so you don't need to involve the UN when allocating wifi spectrum.
- swiley 10y ago
  That would probably be illegal for unlicenced use. WiFi firmware the way it's written now is considered hardware (at least in the US) just like the parent of your comment said.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Other way round: you need to comply with the (national) spectrum allocation. I'm not sure it would be even possible to build a FOSS wifi device without infringing any patents. And, as with other OSHW, how much more are people prepared to pay for that open-ness? I suspect very little.
ddebernardy 10y ago
> Everything would be much easier if we could just have some part of the UN that every country agrees to follow manage a universal spectrum allocation and anyone that disagrees should just expect all of the electronics to break. Not sure it would be. As I understood that's more or less how it works today bar the UN bit. Key industry players chatter and come up with standards that all are reasonably happy with. But then throw in a few countries that want to do things differently just for the sake of it, prior spectrum allocation, and protectionist moves, and you end up where we are today... https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
digi_owl 10y ago
Err, yeah, good luck with that. Sad thing is that is is USA that is the problem child in all this. Being largely isolated from Eurasia, and having just a few big neighbors that are easy to convince to play along, they can basically define the spectrum within their broadcast reach as they see fit. It is basically the same reasoning behind it as why metric is still not the default over there.
- zeveb 10y ago
  > Sad thing is that is is USA that is the problem child in all this. Being largely isolated from Eurasia, and having just a few big neighbors that are easy to convince to play along, they can basically define the spectrum within their broadcast reach as they see fit. Well, and that works in our situation. > It is basically the same reasoning behind it as why metric is still not the default over there. There's also the simple fact that the 'metric' system is just different, not superior in general (i.e., it's better at some things and worse in others). Why impose a bunch of costs for no net benefit? If every other country jumped off a bridge, ought we?
  - FireBeyond 10y ago
    What is the metric system worse at?
    - SamReidHughes 10y ago
      Dividing by 2 or 3. Having useful amounts of precision.
      - FireBeyond 10y ago
        By 2? Because dividing 10 or 100 by 2 is harder than 12 by 2? Three, I'll give you. Useful amounts of precision is a nothing, if you ask me. We start teaching decimals in third grade, and the only real issue with decimals is weather, for which the difference is saying "80F vs 81F", or "26.7 versus 27.2", whose utility is ... limited. For distance, the metric system has finer grained units for precision (come on, break down inches: 1/16, 1/8, 3/16, 1/4, 5/16, 3/8, 1/2, etc... are you going to argue that is better than 25.7cm or 257mm?). I'm not really buying it, as someone who has lived in both worlds.

bubblethink 10y ago

In the US, yes. Ubuntu, VLC and the likes are exempt from this sort of nonsense because they are not registered in the US. I don't know what happens when a US based company like Dell sells laptops with Ubuntu in the US though. They probably would have made some deals.

simonh 10y ago
That's actually easier for a hardware vendor though because they charge money for the product so can factor in licensing costs. Even aside from free software principles, the problem faced by a distro like Fedora is fitting the square peg of paying licensing fees to patent holders through the round hole of providing their software as a free download. BTW, does anyone know if Canonical still pay licensing fees to cover Ubuntu for this sort of thing? I believe they used to.
digi_owl 10y ago
I seem to recall that when you install Ubuntu you have to specifically check a box to say you want the proprietary and patent encumbered stuff. Likely Dell leave that up to the user to install after unboxing. And that is one reason that Mint got popular, because they took Ubuntu and bundled that stuff right on the ISO.
- jhasse 10y ago
  VLC is free software but still isn't included in Fedora because of patent issues. Ubuntu includes it (Ubuntu MATE even in the default install).
TD-Linux 10y ago
Being in the EU is not a magical bullet against software patents. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/blackberry-sues-nokia-over-patents-as-its-phone-business-shuts-down/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/blackberry-sues-...

lmm 10y ago

Any organization with a per-unit revenue stream can easily just pay the MPEG-LA etc. "reasonable and non-discriminatory" fees - they're pretty low. It's only a problem for people who want to distribute linux (or anything that plays music/videos, unless it's just a wrapper that reuses the OS's built-in decoders) completely for free.

gcp 10y ago
Which is why Chrome includes an MPEG-4 AVC/H264 decoder, but Chromium and Firefox do not.
- vetinari 10y ago
  Firefox nowadays downloads a blob for decoding H.264, distributed by Cisco. Cisco pays the fees and they've hit the upper cap time ago anyway. The source for that blob is available, but legally the binary must be distributed by someone, who is paying the fees.
  - gcp 10y ago
    The blob does not decode anything besides Baseline profile. It won't decode any web video.