[Ffmpeg-devel] [Ffmpeg-devel-old] why not have h264encoder in the libavcodec?

Marcus Engene ffmpeg
Wed Nov 9 20:59:47 CET 2005

Derk-Jan Hartman wrote:

> On 9-nov-2005, at 20:29, Dario Andrade wrote:
>>> But because the GPL is "self-centered" (or how could I say selfish
>>> without saying so ?) it doesn't allow other licences to join in,  
>>> except
>>> by being assimilated.
>> Well, you could say GPL is like a virus. Once contaminated with one  GPL
>> project, the whole project is compromised
> "IF" you distribute the program.
> Besides isn't that why we have the preamble in every file? So you  
> KNOW that the code is GPL ?
> I mean if you are too stupid to read the license before you rip the  
> code, then that's your problem.
> GPL is not viral, it's about creating a complete environment free of  
> proprietary software, and "enforcing" that your code is only used by  
> other programs that support the same idea. It's about taking the Red  
> Pill.
> DJ 

 From what I understood, if someone links a LGPL library to the 
proprietary application that's fine as long as the they release the 
LGPL:ed code and the modifications (if any). The commercial application 
code might not be relevant to the code anyway.

With GPL you cannot do this. Instead you must release the full 
application source.

A company usually/often cannot do the GPL way. May it be company policy, 
other licensed code or whatever. So, for them the only way is to write 
their own code. (Or just steal the GPL code as history has shown.). I 
would rather prefer having the company on the side of the project in 
question. With LGPL it's in their interrest to submit patches etc.

Imagine Linux with a license requiring all apps on it to be open source. 
Would IBM etc toss in all the man hours in the project if that was the case?

Mvh Marcus

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list