[FFmpeg-devel] use of UINT64_C in libavutil/common.h

[Måns Rullgård]

VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN <eric2.valette at orange-ftgroup.com> writes:

> On 05/06/2010 10:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN<eric2.valette<at>  orange-ftgroup.com>  writes:
>>
>>
>>> If you make no effort ...
>>>
>> Talking about efforts: Would you mind commenting on issue 1502?
>> http://roundup.ffmpeg.org/issue1502
> Given the fact that orange is a >100K employes company and although
> I'm by no mean entitled to answer, you are somehow lucky because
> although I do not work on this project, I've long been involved with
> GPL issue with other orange branded products and have been involved in
> GPL compliance corporate activity. And I personnaly know people from
> the team who runs this project ;-)
>
> What I can answer is this:
>
> 1) Orange does not produce this software, just rebrand it. So we are
> the first customer ;-). As R&D we would also like having the code to
> do enhancement prototyping most of the time

Are you/Orange aware that by redistributing this software, Orange is
breaking the law, even though a third party created it?

> 2) Orange standard contract with  supplier company states that produce
> the code states that they should
>     a) list all open source code used in their product
>     b) give Orange access to the corresponding source code

So they are not only violating the GPL and the law, but the contract
with Orange as well.  Is that a lawyer over there?

> 3) I will not point the finger at the involved company here but will
> address the issue internally (takes several months to resolve in
> general)

Just give us the name so we can sue them ourselves.

> 4) Orange does slowly understand the consequence of GPL compliance in
> its branded product even if it does buy the software/hardware but
> depends on its partner for getting access to the source code. Supplier
> ususally drag their feet especially when they mixed closed and open
> source
> 5) Along term action is ongoing and corporate guideline are now
> drafted to put ourself in compliance

And before this long-term plan has an effect, you intend to persist in
breaking the law?

> 6) When collecting GPL code via our supplier we must verify that it is
> the code that correspond to the running binaries (quite complicated
> most of the time as it requires toolchains and make files and more
> generally the build procedure for firmware)

The GPL explicitly requires makefiles and other scripts to be included
with the source.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com