"Licensed" codes

[Gordon Messmer]

Mark Hoover wrote:
> 
> Everytime I've seen a reponse like this, I've sat here and wondered why 
> it's always assumed that RedHat has to provide these for free.  I think 
> it would be a great product offering if RedHat could get together 
> perhaps with the developers of products like mplayer, xine, or whatever 
> and license the codecs for use with these programs.

The problem is not that Red Hat would have to provide them for free. 
The problem is that the applications you mention are all licensed under 
the GPL, and that license is fairly stubbornly opposed to any additional 
restrictions beyond those it describes.

So, in order to provide those applications with RHL, you'd have to 
achieve one of two things:

1) Convince all of the contributors for each of those applications that 
the software should be released under a different license, such as the 
BSD license, and then pay for the patent license for the codecs.

2) Negotiate a nonexclusive, transferable, unlimited license for those 
works and all derivatives.

I think the latter is right out, considering that if a patent holder 
granted such a license, they'd never receive another dime of licensing 
income.

The former is also extremely unlikely, as the authors of some of those 
bits of software have stated their positions, and don't sound like 
they'd agree to a non-GPL licensed distribution of their software.