It is very well possible to create a platform indepentent way to access this information. I would like to strongly advise the EU council try to make use of this.
There are free codecs both for broadcasters and viewers. Choosing a closed codec making unable someone to view what is happening in the EU council is not made for everyone which is really in contrast with wath the EU council is made for.
There is no reason other than ignorance and possibly protection of vested interests to refrain from using free streaming servers and media codecs to distribute this type of content.
Open Source users are typically interested in building something stable and free from a community perspective. Can the EU afford to exclude that type of person?
Using an open standard would reach 100% of the EC's constituency.
MPEG or Quicktime will play on all computers. Theora is a good choice, too. The choice of WMV is adding insult to injury. WMV will only play on certain computers
with a specific agreement with Microsoft.
The WMV format has been instrumental in the anti-competitive and illegal
behavior that the cause of MS' legal difficulties in the EU. Simply put,
MS has been using its exclusive control of the WMV format, its use and
implementation to extend its desktop monopoly into media. Its use implies
an endorsement of the company's business practices by the EC at the same time the European Union's courts are trying to punish that company for said behaviors.
Best to save face and use an open format.
there has just been a big battle to force microsoft to open up standards and then then the EU parliment implements a closed non-standard protocol for an important service, so that the EU actually supports microsoft in locking out its competitors.
As a EU citizen, I ask for the support of free software and Linux in particular. It is of the duty of the EU Council to protect our freedom of choice and free software.
The existing "explanation" sounds like a personally-politicised one. There is no legal reason why a public site is tied to using a proprietary format; in fact, legally, it's more tricky to force users into a specific vendor's solution...
Unfortunately, this can be seen as yet another example of incompetent and arrogant behaviour from an expensive, lazy, micromanaging, self-appointed EU bureaucracy. Dear Council, please learn something from your past mistakes or you'll be suprised again when democracy has a say.
Its just plain dumb/corrupt ou both.
there are many formats better than wmv and non copyrigthed.
wmv is a worst solution more expensive but someone gets to pocket the money... if not, and they are just plain
imcompetent for the money we are paying them we could have a much better staff
Public services should be available to all users where possible. To choose WMV format and then say that it is illegal to support on linux is just bad planning. Use an open standard that all are able to support legally.
This is the Council of the European Union, not a commercial entity. It should serve the people the best way imagineable, which includes refraining from pushing them into using this or that proprietary system.
