[FFmpeg-devel] GOM Player on the Blacklisted Projects

[Diego Biurrun]

Thanks for not top-posting.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:53:33AM +0900, ??? Ethan Park wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Diego Biurrun [mailto:diego at biurrun.de]
> > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 2:12 AM
> > 
> > I would appreciate avoiding top-posting in email communication, thank
> > you in advance.
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 05:34:36PM +0900, ??? Ethan Park wrote:
> > >
> > > My name is Ethan Park, and I am the product manager for GOM Player.
> > 
> > I am Diego Biurrun, I am the MPlayer webmaster and also happen to handle
> > its legal affairs.
> > 
> > > I noticed that our product is on the Blacklisted Projects list on your
> > > website (http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/projects.html).
> > >
> > > We have always mentioned FFmpeg with a link to the modified source
> > > code under Copyright Info on our Korean version of GOM Player
> > > (which is the most important version for us as it has more than
> > > 10x users than the English version), however we have failed to do
> > > so on our English version up until version 2.1.8. This wasn?t
> > > intentional, but rather a lack of our translation effort. We do
> > > sincerely apologize for violating your terms. However, we have not
> > > received your ?requests to mark [the] originals? as mentioned on
> > > your website, unfortunately.
> > >
> > > Our most up to date GOM Player (Version 2.1.9.3752) does give credit
> > > to FFmpeg, includes a copy of LGPL, and provides a link to the URL
> > > where you can obtain the modified source code of FFmpeg for free of
> > > charge.
> > >
> > > I hope you will consider removing our product from your blacklist.
> > 
> > We are investigating the issue, you shall hear from us soon.
> 
> Diego-
> Can you please give us an update on this issue?

We have not yet investigated this in detail, but I notice the following
issues:

- The source code tarball contains no license file.
- It's completely unclear which version of FFmpeg your code is based on
  and what changes you made.

- There are a bunch of files with incompatible licenses, namely

skl_dct.h
skl_dct.c
i386/skl_dct_sse.asm
i386/skl_dct_sse2.asm
i386/skl_nasm.h

/********************************************************
 * Some code. Copyright (C) 2003 by Pascal Massimino.   *
 * All Rights Reserved.      (http://skal.planet-d.net) *
 * For Educational/Academic use ONLY. See 'LICENSE.TXT'.*
 ********************************************************/

You seem to be using these illegally.  There is no LICENSE.TXT file
included in the zip file you provide.

Then there are these two files:

i386/skl_fdct_mmx.asm
i386/skl_fdct_sse2.asm

These files are licensed under the GPL, not the LGPL.  You ship the
binary together with the LGPL license, but by using these two files all
of the binary is covered by the GPL, not the LGPL.

Furthermore, this does not appear to be the source code for the complete
application.

Diego
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20080324/9af6c5ac/attachment.pgp>