DVD And Other Codecs For Linux Explained

Hello Matt,

Your passing comment that Mandriva (and Linspire) include LinDVD (and the rest of the community gets the full on shaft – I agree) prompted me to pass along a little additional information for those who use Mandriva. I use Mandriva Linux 2007.1 (Spring) Free download edition here. I have LinDVD installed. I downloaded it from SoS (Seer-of Souls) at http://seerofsouls.com/ (this package is a beta version).

After installing the LinDVD package, I encountered two problems while attempting to use it. I have a CD-ROM drive (/dev/hdc – secondary master) mounted at /media/cdrom and a DVD burner (/dev/hdd – secondary slave) mounted at /media/cdrom2.

The first problem: LinDVD accesses the CD-ROM, not the DVD drive. The LinDVD properties dialog reports the DVD Drive as /mnt/cdrom. I changed the DVD’s mount point from /media/cdrom2 to /mnt/cdrom. LinDVD still accesses the CD-ROM (even following a reboot). I reassigned the DVD’s mount point to /media/cdrom2 then shut down the system and switched the device assignments for the DVD and CD-ROM drives (open the case and change the jumpers on the back of the drives) making the DVD secondary master (/dev/hdc) and the CD-ROM secondary slave (/dev/hdd). Now LinDVD accesses the DVD drive.

The second problem: DVD’s play for a limited time (about 3 to 5 minutes) then stop. I rememberd seeing a similar post on LQ so I searched there and found the post with the solution which is to copy /usr/share/lindvd/libivimandriva.so to /usr/lib as root in a terminal window (cp /usr/share/lindvd/libivimandriva.so /usr/lib/). I prefer to create a symbolic link in /usr/lib pointing to /usr/share/lindvd/libivimandriva.so (ln -s -T /usr/share/lindvd/libivimandriva.so /usr/bin/libivimandriva.so). Both methods work equally well. I simply perfer to use a link. If LinDVD is updated, the link may be broken when I install the update, but I will not end up with multiple versions of the library on my system.

I do not know if the LinDVD package shipped with the commercial (not for free) version of Mandriva has the same problems.

I might offer the alternative approach of heading over to medibuntu and following their instructions to add their repository and security key. Additionally I’d recommend making sure the following are installed: libdvdcss2, w32codecs, ffmpeg, mkisofs, and transcode. In addition to these necessities, medibuntu offers a variety of useful packages enhanced for Ubuntu.

If one really wants to work with multimedia, I’d also suggest Kino, Mplayer (with mencoder), Cinelerra and acidrip.

And for those on Mandriva who believe in civil disobedience where it is needed, there is PLF. As I don’t want to get Lockergnome into too much trouble here, I definitely recommend Mandriva users who are willing to go this route to google for the “Penguin Liberation Front” and EasyURPMI to set this up.

I recently started playing around with Ubuntu Linux myself, so I found this article interesting.

However, it does bother me that Linux users seem to have this attitude that everything should be handed to them for free, and if something is not handed over for free, then it’s OK to go out and steal it, because “Linux users are being given the shaft.”

Seems to me if you want free software, you have to be happy to settle for whatever you can get for free. If you want software that is not being offered for free, then you should be prepared to pay for it. After all, the owners of MPEG, MP3, WMV, etc., are entitled to get paid for their work. Why do Linux users think it is OK to steal from them, or demand that they work for free? Do you work for free? If so, let me know, as I have a job for you! On the other hand, if you expect to get paid for your work, then it is time to grow up and realize that other people also expect to get paid for their work and it is not OK to steal from them just because you think you should get everything you want for free.

Rick

Rick:

When a company/group.whomever monopolizes a particular way of interacting with content, then they had darn well better offer that same ability across the board. Not because its fair, but for their ability to curb poor PR and keep people from jumping ship due to discriminatory perceptions. It’s a PR game, pure and simple.

See, we as Linux users (most of us) are willing to pay for it. Unfortunately, those who hold those IP rights to these codecs are not interested selling licenses to those of us on a ‘free’ OS. The closest we have come is with Linspire, a Linux company that I have invested my own money and time with. So do not misunderstand, we ask for no free lunch, rather to stop being segregated with closed format accessibility. And if you think that this is about money, then the Microsoft PR machine has you fooled. It’s about control and control over the way you access content. I assure you money has NOTHING to do with the coming format wars. Not between OS’, anyway.

As for the current holders of the licenses themselves, much of the ‘work’ has long since been paid off. Fine, no harm no foul. Now allow me to pay for a legitimate license or watch others create work-arounds for me.

As for stealing, it’s very hard to define stealing an idea. Written work, sure. Composed music, this has been argued, but ok. However to create a means of watching or listening to content, then CHOOSING to restrict access to it by not allowing us the free right to purchase this ourselves is begging for problems, as Microsoft has discovered for years now. Just because its legal does not make it a successful, long term idea.

Have creators of the formats listed above been stung by this ‘theft’ as they have made it impossible to participate in much of the online media-scape without these said formats, give me a break. It is stealing? Suppose it depends on who you ask and which country you live in. Outside of the USA, most would scoff at the very idea of our patent system anyway. I support patents myself, with access being made as I feel its a responsibility to make them accessible for whatever the market will bear. After all, I am not a socialist. Surprised?

If you wish to protect your software, more power to you. But when you grow to a point to where alternatives are near scarce and you do so with the mission to ensure use of a single operating system platform, which is what drives WMV among others, then that sir, is a monopoly and we are tired of being shafted.

Microsoft: Make the formats available for sale to us, because the license must be paid – and you will find that life will become a lot less of a hassle for you.

It’s a lot like saying we’ll make sure you pay a lesser gas tax, so that we do not have to build roads in your neighborhood. What? You think these roads are free? Don’t like it – move. Sound familiar? It’s Microsoft’s mantra, but with Windows instead of roads.

Thankfully Flash is helping to bridge the gap that Microsoft have worked so hard to create. Sorry if this seems rather pointed, but please make sure you are working with true information and not another company’s PR copy. Do not base your opinions on that of extreme anti-IP right users like we see overseas. Here in the US, we are more than happy to pay our dues. Unfortunately, the tollbooth is choosing not to let us in. As history has dictated time and time again, people do not generally react well to this kind of thing. So it’s a choice, thelicense holders have made it.

And I realize I am mainly pointing at Microsoft here, but this is because they are the biggest offender, while others have simply chosen to ignore this continued ‘theft’. :)

Hi Matt,

First, let me make clear that I’m not a MS fanboy and I’m not here to spread MS propaganda, or defend MS in any particular way. On the other hand, I am not an MS Basher, either. I don’t see MS as the horrible, evil empire that many Linux fans seem to think it is. MS is far from perfect, but MS is not the worst business in the world either. As a business person myself, I understand that businesses exist to make money for the owners of the business. Plain and simple. Businesses do not exist to give things away for free.

Now, I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on all the issues with getting codecs for Linux vs. other OSes. However, I am under the impression that Mac OS X is a form of Linux, and somehow they have support for MP3s and playing DVDs (MPEG video), WMV, etc., don’t they? How did they get that functionality? I’m guessing they (Apple) paid for the rights to use the codecs…?

You mentioned that Linspire also has these codecs. All I know about Linspire is that I just now took a look at their web site and see that it is a Linux product that you have to pay for. So I’m guessing that they, in turn, are paying for the rights to use the codecs in their version of Linux…?

So, what is the real issue here? Clearly the owners of these codecs are not out to make Windows the only viable OS by restricting access to their codecs, as you seem to be suggesting. If Apple and Linspire can get them, that tells me that MS doesn’t have complete control over access to the codecs. Furthermore, contrary to what you say, it seems you do “have a choice” in the matter. You could PAY for Linspire, instead of insisting on using a free version of Linux, if you really want the codecs.

Perhaps the issue is that the owners of the codecs are not interested in being in the retail software sales business? Perhaps they are only interested in selling licenses to other vendors (MS, Apple, Linspire, etc.) who will then support the whole retail end of the business? I’m just guessing here, but I bet that might have something to do with it.

I am a believer in property rights. If I write a program to do something unique, that program is my property. I am entitled to do with it as I please. If I want to sell my program to you, that is my choice. If I don’t want to sell it to you, that is also my choice. If I want to sell my program to MS, Apple and Linspire, but don’t want to get into the retail software business, again, that is my choice.

You have a choice, too. You can buy my software the way I feel like selling it, or you can do with it. You don’t have a right to dictate how I should sell my software or who I should sell it to.

Our system of copyrights and patents is not perfect, but I think it is far better than what exists in other parts of the world, where anyone can steal anyone else’s work and sell it as their own.

Please don’t get the impression that I am attacking or criticizing you, personally. I’ve been reading Lockergnome for many years and I pretty much always read your columns. So don’t take me wrong. I’m just trying to get to the bottom of the issues here and understand what the deal is. As I said in my previous post, in my limited experience with Linux and Linux users, I am constantly given the impression that Linux users expect everything to be handed to them for free, and, in my mind, your article furthered that impression. If I am misunderstanding your intent, then please help set me straight.

Rick

Rick: Good points, especially regarding Linspire. As for Apple, you nailed an interesting and fascinating story actually. See, in many respects, the ‘Linux collective” and the GPL license itself, has been a double edge sword in the truest sense of the word.

Apple’s OS is based on a Unix operating system called BSD. Just as Linux is modeled on Unix, BSD has a very liberal license that is in my opinion, superior to that of the GPL. Now here is the twist – they are both Open Source. Confused? I was too once as the licensing is very deep and bizarre. At its core, the BSD license allows Apple to take BSD open source code, add it to their own offerings, which are closed source, only to create the OS X we know today.

http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html

Now Linux on the other hand, is actually a kernel, not an OS specifically. From this kernel, various distributors created Linux distributions in which we know today as Debian, Fedora, SuSE, etc.

http://kde-files.org/CONTENT/content-files/44218-linuxdistrotimeline-7.2.png

What you said about becoming a retail outlet I think really hit home, great point – seriously, that was well put. I can certainly understand that. But the same time, working for a closed source company myself, having consulted with others in this field and even having spoken to a Microsoft employee who shall remain nameless due to his position, I would say that it is believed that Microsoft has placed themselves into a role of responsibility as they grew. They are a monopoly, but they as you have pointed out, created some good things along the way. I am rabid Windows Mobile user – nothing else meets my needs. I subscribe to an Exchange server for pennies over at DSL Extreme and keep my life synced with Evolution on Ubuntu. This is how it ought to be, even considering Microsoft has the right to drop support of this should they choose to.

And I would also point out that Microsoft, among others, have been fingered numerous times in violating other’s patents with media codec related issues. But it is this sort of thing that just kills me:

http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-5166786.html

When does it stop? Comcast DVRs, powered by Microsoft technology. Back in 2004, the possibility of DVDs, all of them, powered by Microsoft and on and on. So as I sit here in my cave, devoid of technology as I would need to purchase a license just to talk about technology…

I know this sounds extreme, but we are not all that far from it – I have been studying them amongst other like-minded companies for years and they are hardly in it for the money anymore. To them these days, it’s more about a common vision, one where they and others like Google make the rules. And remember I say this as an American and as a capitalist

Coming again to Linspire, despite some areas where they remain lax, they did one thing right and present a marketplace where closed and open source software is available to those who wish to use it. Some is for sale, some is for free, all of it works on a Linux OS.

What makes this comical however, is that distros that bundled restricted codecs do so against the GPL license which is protecting Linux itself. So Xandros, Linspire, among others who are selling to US citizens may be following the license rules for these formats, but at a cost of violating the rules of the GPL license itself, which is a civil matter.
Wild, huh? :)

Anywho, keep up with the great comments, always appreciated.

Matt,

Thanks for the links and all the background info. This is the kind of thing that has always made Lockergnome a great resource!

I also appreciate being able to have a reasonable discussion with someone regarding Linux. I’ve been trying to discuss things like this with people in various forums, and it seems so many Linux users see their choice of which OS to use as being almost like a choice of religion. As such, as soon as I say something that contradicts what they want to believe, the discussion quickly turns to name calling and personal insults. For me, there is no value in such discussions.

Rick

Rick: Anytime, hope to have provided valuable info in addition to some food for thought. On another note, it may be worth checking out Freespire here soon as they will be launching the new CNR plugin here on the 20th, if they stay on schedule. As you see here…

http://tinyurl.com/2zubwt

…they have a signed agreement with Microsoft over their IP claims, so this provides security for those who wish it. I bought a copy of Linspire 6 yesterday. It’s brand new, still waiting for CNR to come back, but in many ways, looks very promising. ;)

If you read yesterday’s report over at Lockergnome’s IT Pro, you will see that Linspire and I have had a long love/hate relationship, since their original CEO move on. We’ll work it out though, I know good people over there.

Rick Hogan:

You write:
“You have a choice, too. You can buy my software the way I feel like selling it, or you can do with it. You don’t have a right to dictate how I should sell my software or who I should sell it to.”

But what about the choice of writing my own software that solve the same problem in a better way ? Are you for freedom or against it ?

I am new to linux and I see some things that it will not do one is play dvd’s, you can gatther all the files it askes for and it keeps wanting another file everytime you try to play something to support the last file you put in that was supposed to have it. I contacted WinDVD on possible release date of LinDVD that I would purchase and their recomendation was to go back to windows. I have several windows machines and I am not doing that. Intervideo is one of the least recognised players in windows, but does come oem on a lot of shlf machines. linux would have something if you installed something and it actually worked without having to search all over creation and back to find the supporting files. Hopefully they will get through this so Linux can be fore everyone. Ujnless you have a load of time on your hands stay with windows cause you will never have enough time to get everything working on linux box.

Ron: You must be using a really interesting distribution of Linux because if you are installing the package needed, it will not give you any problem.

If you can give me a clear idea of what your Linux distribution is telling you is missing, how you are going about getting DVDs to playback and what software you used to make it run thus far, you might find that this is actually quite simple.

But the first rule of successfully using Linux is asking clear, concise questions when having problems. Not needing to know the geeky terms, just what you tried exactly in your own words; versus:

…”you can gather all the files it asks for and it keeps wanting another file every time you try to play something to support the last file you put in that was supposed to have it.”

I have absolutely no idea what that means. Again, just slow down, explain where you started from and walk me through the process rather than contacting a Windows software company like WinDVD who are clearly not interested in helping you. :)

Would love to help.