[FFmpeg-devel] Fw: ffmpeg GPL violation

[Jethro Walters]

--- On Fri, 3/10/08, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> wrote:

> From: Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Fw: ffmpeg GPL violation
> To: "FFmpeg development discussions and patches" <ffmpeg-devel at mplayerhq.hu>
> Date: Friday, 3 October, 2008, 8:59 AM
> On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 02:07:06AM +0200, Gianluigi Tiesi
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 12:17:00AM +0200, Diego
> Biurrun wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 08:06:26PM +0000, Jethro
> Walters wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Just passing through the "Hall Of
> Shame" on ffmpeg's website, and
> > > > found Voltaic's website, and this little
> snippet on this page:
> > > > http://shedworx.com/volmac-legal
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "VoltaicHD for Mac is copyright
> Systemic Pty Ltd.
> > > >
> > > > VoltaicHD for Mac utilises the FFmpeg video
> application for one
> > > > part of the conversion process. FFmpeg is
> used in 'binary' form and
> > > > the source code of ffmpeg will be provided
> with the next release of
> > > > VoltaicHD for Mac.
> > > >
> > > > FFmpeg is a trademark of Fabrice Bellard,
> originator of the FFmpeg project.
> > > > 
> > > > FFmpeg is licensed under the LGPL."
> > > > 
> > > > So, should this stay in the Hall of Shame?
> > > 
> > > It will definitely stay in the Hall of Shame,
> they are not in compliance
> > > with the license at all!
> > > 
> > > A promise to provide the source some day is not
> sufficient.
> > 
> > they don't need to provide sources if the binary
> is built from
> > unmodified ffmpeg source, the point is understand if
> their binary
> > is modified or not
> 
> You distribute MPlayer (and thus FFmpeg) yourself, you
> should really
> know better.  It's disheatening to see how few people
> seem to have
> actually read the (L)GPL.  Now please go back and read it,
> thanks.

I understand we use LGPL v2.1 or later. Current latest version is 3. Should I baseline what I'm looking for under LGPL v2.1 or v3?

Jethro Walters