this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2025
157 points (98.2% liked)
Linux
59014 readers
694 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's not an attack on ffmpeg. It's 1,000% not fud. I'm not disputing its libre bonifides. H265 is not libre. It's also not part of the ffmpeg code. But they can be distributed together because it's non-commercial.
My apologies if I worded something in a way that wasn't clear about that.
Separate from that issue.
There are distros that do not want to incorporate any non-libre elements into their OS for ideological reasons. They won't have h265.
Then there are distros that have commercial elements, or for which their parent company has some kind of commercial interest in the distribution. If they don't want to pay for licensing they may have legal limitations on their ability to incorporate h265.
But any completely non-commercial software that wants to bundle h265 in has cart blanche to do so.
I hope that clears things up.
H.265 is also not software but a specification that ffmpeg implements, and the implementation is libre. Additionally there's also x265 a decoder/encoder that also implements it, that ffmpeg can use, but that is also FOSS.
To be clear: ffmpeg does not ship any proprietary blobs in order to decode H.265. It's implementation of H.265 is fully FOSS as well.
This is plain wrong and repeating it doesn't make it any better. A libre distro with only libre software can decode H.265 just fine. In multiple ways.
I'm trusting your claim here, that that's the case, but even then, it would be more like: Any completely non-commercial software can ship a FOSS H.265 implementation with a bundled royalty free license.
If you don't want to bundle a license, you don't have this problem to begin with, you can let the user worry about that, which the user can then just dismiss without legal consequences (in any sane legal system).
Okay this is officially getting too goddamn pedantic for me. I will trust that you're correct on all this.