On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Dean Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you're saying that nothing on YouTube should be considered free > culture? Only videos encoded as ogg theora (or a handful of other free > codecs) can be considered free culture? Hm, so people modifying videos are likely to do it from some better source than a .flv file snarfed from YouTube -- if there's a high quality version for people to edit and sample from, then it should be in a format that doesn't require any proprietary software. Theora would be good there. > Is it only ok if there have been free software workarounds (as in the > case of many video codecs)? What if we find a way to use garageband > files in audacity? What about a text file saved as a .pdf? a .doc? I don't think people should need to install binary codecs, if that's what you're asking. PDF is a standard format, but no, GarageBand and Word Documents, not in my opinion. > I agree that we should shoot for open and royalty free platforms, > standards and technologies, but if I understand you correctly, your > idea seems downright draconian. Standards are good, and if no standard exists, then a free software format is better than a proprietary one. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
