[FFmpeg-devel] VDD 2023, FFmpeg meeting notes, (23-11-2023, 4pm, Dublin)

[Nicolas George]

Kyle Swanson (12023-09-24):
> DNS
> ---
> 
> -   Currently the DNS of ffmpeg.org is managed by Fabrice
> -   Michael was asked if he has control over the ffmpeg.org DNS register.
> -   Michael says he thinks he has some.
> -   Ronald would be curious to know what "some" means.
> -   Ronald proposes current project owners should have control over DNS and
> trademark.
> -   Ronald: Fabrice is not active, DNS and trademark should be in the
> control of project members.
> -   Michael: "i think fabrice should stay in ultimate control", "he has
> always acted in the best interests of the people".
> -   Ronald took a poll in the room, most agreed current project developers
> should have control of this.
> -   This will need a vote, Fabrice will need to be contacted.
> -   We would prefer to bring voting results to Fabrice, hopeful that
> Fabrice would be amicable to handover.

Hi.

For an impartial arbiter, NOT being involved in the project, not being
part of the current drama, is a significant plus.

But first, we must ask what we want: do we want an impartial arbiter,
somebody who is trusted to have the best interest of a certain
conception of the project in mind and who can step in in case of a
failure of project democracy? Or do we not want that, just direct
control over the DNS by the admins.

Impartial and benevolent arbiters are hard to come by. We are lucky that
we have somebody who can be considered impartial and benevolent by
definition. I think we would be mad not to rejoice of it.

It is worth remembering that, IIRC, if Fabrice was not the ultimate
arbiter for the name FFmpeg, then the fork from >10 years ago would not
have been a fork, it would have been a successful coup. And then, since
the same causes lead to the same results, it would have progressively
died like it did, just more slowly, because having the recognized name
does override removing features that users enjoy.

Since we are FFmpeg, not avconv, we are happy that the coup was thwarted
by Fabrice's authority. We should look with a lot of suspicion any
attempt to weaken this last line of defence. By the way, I think it is
worth re-reading the mail announcing the coup:
http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2011-January/106403.html
There is a name that sticks out with regard to the present discussion.


Another point. Fabrice chose to give us the code, he chose not to give
us the name but only to lend it. That is his choice. Both the code and
the name belong to him, to do as he will. As members of the Libre
Software movement, we should rejoice he gave the code. But the name is
something different entirely: code is about skill, names are about
emotions.

Even if he has not contributed for more than a decade, Fabrice still has
the reputation for being the author of FFmpeg and FFmpeg still has the
reputation for being one of Fabrice's projects, and unless I am
mistaken, the first F still means Fabrice.

So if Fabrice were to believe that what the projects would be becoming
reflects poorly on him, hurts his reputation, he is entirely within his
rights, moral and legal, to refuse to be associated with it any longer.
“Sorry guys, you've turned my code to shit, I'm taking the name back.”

(It also matches somewhat the way French copyright law: patrimonial can
be ceded, but moral rights cannot.)

So, if the General Assembly were to decide to try to get control over
the trademark and DNS, it would be entirely within its rights, but I
believe both the good of the project and Fabrice's own interest would
suggest he should refuse. And I firmly reserve the right to make that
point to him, privately.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20231003/936f85df/attachment.sig>