[FFmpeg-devel] GP License question

[Aaron Boxer]

Hi Hendrik,


On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Aaron Boxer <boxerab at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Hendrick
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Aaron Boxer <boxerab at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > I am developing a jpeg 2000 codec licensed under Affero GPL.
> >> > If I were to integrate this into FFMpeg, would I then have to
> >> > re-release FFMpeg under Affero GPL ?
> >> >
> >>
> >> AGPL is evil, please keep it out of FFmpeg.
> >>
> >
> > Would you mind telling me more about why you feel AGPL is evil ?
> >
>
> The problem with a license like the AGPL is that its inherently
> incompatible with anything else.
> Heck, you couldn't even build a non-free build with AGPL components,
> because non-free only governs distribution of the binary, but AGPL has
> extra conditions for things like being reachable over the network.
>
> Its a nightmare to combine with anything else.
>


Well, as I understand it, the only difference between GPL 3 and AGPL is the
definition of distribution: AGPL considers the network as another form of
distribution
To close the loophole where GPL software is run "in the cloud" and
modifications to the software
do not have to be made available to users.

So, if GPL 2 is acceptable, I don't see why AGPL is considered so terrible.

Just my personal opinion, of course.

Thanks for everyone's feedback, I hope I haven't offended anyone here.

Kind Regards,
Aaron