[Mplayer-users] (no subject)
nickols_k at mail.ru
Wed May 30 00:01:01 CEST 2001
On Tue, 29 May 2001 18:49:52 +0200, Gabucino wrote:
>It's the Question that drives us, Arpi :
>> Btw. If we are using older mpglib version (which was GPL), then can we
>> distribute it as GPL?
>Very very good question. Is there a lawyer in the house? :)
Why you don't want distribute mplayer under complex licence?
Since mplayer consist from different parts of sources which are
distributed under different licence agreements you can linense
own parts of code under GPL and declare that some parts of mplayer
as distributed under their own licences. It's right way. The fact that mplayer-0.11
was distributed without licence don't preserves you from amenability for distribution
already licenced parts. But you don't violated any copy rights therefore you can to
continue distribution of mplayer with the same stuffs of parts but under different licence
agreements. If mp3lib is distributed under LGPL - you can't change this licence and
licence of mplayer don't cover the licences of its parts. But if you are able to prove
that you use "old" sources which were distributed ander GPL - then you are right.
Anyway, you can license own part of code by your opinion but not all.
Best solution in this case - put licence agrements in each subfolder with original README
of the libraries and warn user about. IMHO opendivx developers don't forbit distribution of
odivx library in the source. Simply place their licence in the odivx sufolder and make
warning in your licence about copyrights and copylefts.
Anyway you are free to apply any licence agreement to mplayer( not only GPL;) and change
it in the future:
for example - close the source and sell mplayer for money, but in this case last GPL'ed version
of mplayer can be contuned with developing by other people under GPL. The same is justly
to parts of mplayer today.
Best regards! Nick
Mplayer-users mailing list
Mplayer-users at lists.sourceforge.net
More information about the MPlayer-users