How to remove JPEG, MPEG, GIF, DOC and other unwanted patented software?
Patented codecs are recommended. I think, it is MALWARE. I need to remove libdrm (DRM), all non-free codecs and other software. How to do this?
P. S. I need to remove *.doc(x) formats support from LibreOffice.
P. S. Trisquel site BG is JPEG. Please, fix it.
Other formats: ico, wav, bmp. I don't know about license — I think it is proprietary.
If codecs are critical for Trisquel, I deleting this OS and switching to gNewSense.
Just a general rule: don't react to things with extremism, especially things you don't know about. I see this mistake from new people all too often. Take a deep breath and actually learn why Trisquel doesn't filter out all of these things; don't assume that it's because Trisquel is "malware".
I'll just tackle all of your concerns:
- JPEG is a non-patented, non-secret format. It poses no problems at all for anybody. It's currently the best format for lossy image compression.
- I think all of the MPEG formats are patent-encumbered. So if you're in a position where you're likely to be attacked by patent trolls, not having support for them may be a good idea. In that case, just remove the "libgstreamer-plugins-bad0.10-0" package. However, you are probably not in such a position.
- All of the patents on LZW (the part of GIF that was patent-encumbered) expired years ago. You don't need to worry about expired patents. The only reason not to use GIF now is that PNG is simply a better format.
- .doc is not patent-encumbered, just secret. It's not very good to give people .doc files, but you aren't going to benefit at all from refusing to run libre software that is able to read this format due to reverse-engineering.
- I think that .docx is patent-encumbered, but for the moment, Microsoft has promised not to sue anyone for patent infringement. Again, you ought to not give people these files, but you gain nothing from not being able to read them.
- .ico, .wav, and .bmp are all non-patented and non-secret. They don't have "licenses". No license is needed if the format isn't encumbered by patents.
- As root_vegetable said, "DRM" in the context of Linux means "Direct Rendering Manager". You shouldn't just assume you know what something is based on its name like that. Without the DRM, I don't think you would be able to use a graphical display at all.
I think it's not what this guy thinks it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Rendering_Manager
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_restrictions_management
Wikimedia Commons and file formats
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_types
"Wikimedia Commons only accepts "free content"; likewise, ONLY free file formats are allowed.
Patent-encumbered file formats are not accepted at Wikimedia Commons.
On Wikimedia Commons, the file types we recommend are: SVG, PNG, and JPEG.
BMP files are not allowed on Commons. These can be losslessly converted to PNG, and the file size will always be smaller."
JPEG JFIF status
https://www.w3.org/Graphics/JPEG/
"Although the "baseline" variety of JPEG is believed patent-free, there are many patents associated with some optional features of JPEG, namely arithmetic coding and hierarchical storage. For this reason, these optional features are never used on the Web."
Libjpeg is free software
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libjpeg
"libjpeg is a widely used free library with functions for handling the JPEG image data format. It implements a JPEG codec (encoding and decoding) alongside various utilities for handling JPEG data. It is written in C and distributed as free software together with its source code under the terms of a custom permissive (BSD-like) free software license, which basically demands attribution. The original variant is maintained and published by the Independent JPEG Group (IJG)."
About DRM and JPEG
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/10/theres-no-drm-jpeg-lets-keep-it-way
"We encourage the JPEG committee to continue work on an open standards based Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) architecture for JPEG images that could meet some of the legitimate use cases for improved privacy and security, in an open, backwards-compatible way. However, we warn against any attempt to use the file format itself to enforce the privacy or security restrictions that its metadata describes, by locking up the image or limiting the operations that can be performed on it."
RMS is in town
Now, would Richard allow jpg photos on his site, if they were detrimental to his freedoms?
Please, tell me about .midi (timidity package).
P. S. Patent? QM-coder, IBM, JPEG.
If it is one patented symbol in the text, I hate this text (example). :)
P. P. S. I removed all bad, ugly gstreamer plugins. And Kazam & Pitivi.
MIDI is a non-patented, non-secret format. It's pretty much just a sequence of notes.
QM-coder is related to an obscure format called JBIG, not JPEG. And those patents are all expired. Why are you actively trying to find reasons to excommunicate file formats?
You're still reacting to things you don't know about with extremism. I don't "hate" MP3 files. I also don't refuse to listen to them. I avoid distributing them because there are still some active patents on the format (until 2017 or 2018, I'm not sure which), and I don't want to invite legal trouble for myself or anyone else.
The real issue is what formats are popularly being used. We need to work on non-patented, non-secret formats to make them better than patent-encumbered formats so that ordinary people will be more likely to choose them and harware manufacturers will be more likely to support hardware-accelerated decoding of them, and we need to make it easy for all relevant software (and that includes proprietary software) to support these non-patented, non-secret formats.
All patents expired? I don't want "non-free extension for free applet".
"Although the "baseline" variety of JPEG is believed patent-free, there are many patents associated with some optional features of JPEG, namely arithmetic coding and hierarchical storage. For this reason, these optional features are never used on the Web.".
If patented features are available on Trisquel, I need to remove the GUI, because I can't remove libjpeg without removing lots graphical packages.
> If patented features are available on Trisquel, I need to remove the GUI, because I can't remove libjpeg without removing lots graphical packages.
Then remove the GUI. I don't care; it's your life. But if you're going to be this absurdly paranoid, maybe you should just not use a computer at all. There are legitimate obstacles to liberty in computing we have to deal with, like the fact that all modern x86 CPUs refuse to even boot without proprietary software, and here you are moaning about imagined risks from patents that are not applicable, expired, not an imminent threat, or even purely hypothetical.
So, I can use JPEG & other now, MPEG at 2018. Please, close the topic.
