[FFmpeg-devel] Sovereign Tech Fund

[Michael Niedermayer]

Hi Remi, Jonatas (for the sanctioned list question)

On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 09:17:03PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le sunnuntaina 28. tammikuuta 2024, 5.25.49 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > Please read the following to get a better understanding what STF is about:
> > (In short it is about maintenance and sustainability, not features)
> > https://www.sovereigntechfund.de/programs/applications
> > 
> > As some probably already know, Thilo has worked with STF to work out
> > many details of this. SPI will handle the financials for FFmpeg.
> 
> As anybody who's been following FFmpeg-devel knows, people have pointed out 
> SPI seems like a poor choice of vehicle for that sort of commission. I won't 
> repeat the arguments that were already made in the second half of last year.

I have seen people associated with commercial entities (FFlabs and Videolabs)
being against SPI.
Given that FFlabs tried to obtain money from STF there is significant conflict
of interrest here.
At least thats how it looks to me.

Of course thats no reason to dismiss any arguments, its just some background not
everyone might be aware of


> 
> But I will add a few comments...
> 
> > Everyone willing to benefit from this sponsorship must not be a US sanctioned
> > entity or in a US sanctioned country. 
> 
> In other words, the choice of a US vehicle is excluding people who are, or 
> fear that they may be affected by US sanctions. Some active developers are 
> associated with, for example, the Chinese Academy of Science, Huawei 
> Technologies or other Chinese IT R&D entites. This is discriminatory, and thus 
> something that an open-source project should actively seek to *avoid*.

There are a few things here.
First we dont sponsor huawei or another company, and iam also sure STF would not
approve that.
Paying some employee of huawei or member of the Chinese Academy of Science
IIUC would only be a problem if that person is personally on the sanctions list.
which you can check here:
https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/
But maybe Jonatas can confirm?

Also i iam not sure germany/STF is ok with funding people on the OFAC list
(they technically maybe should not care but i still would not assert that
 as a given)


[...]
>
> > At this point, what we need is a list of Projects so we can submit an
> > application to STF at or before 12th Feb. (at the 14th they have a meeting
> > and will review our submission) What STF told us, they need ATM is:
> 
> The "selection criteria" seem rather restrictive. It seems that critical tasks 
> such as long-term maintainance (Anton) and security fixes (you) are in scope. 
> Though I can only agree with Kieran that SoW is ill-suited for tasks of the 
> sort. If SPI insists on SoW, which is somewhat understandable from their legal 
> and moral standpoint, then that is another reason why SPI should not, or 
> maybe, cannot, be the vehicle.
> 
> By stretching the criteria a little, maybe reasonably expected external or 
> normative updates are also in scope, like say implementing optimisations for 
> new ISA extensions or new codec profiles. But implementing entirely new 
> features seems unambiguously excluded, especially if competing with existing 
> open-source projects. Prototypes are also *explicitly* excluded. So for the 
> sake of the argument, reimplementing X264, dav1d or GNU/radio functionality in 
> FFmpeg seems like it would not qualify.
> 
> I am not a lawyer, but there may be nontrivial legal implications for SPI and 
> the contractees here. Note that I do not mean to argue against the 
> restrictions here. They make perfect sense considering that this funding would 
> ultimately come from the German tax payers.
> 
> (...)
> 
> > My suggestion is that we create a Trac WIKI page similar to the ideas
> > page for GSoC.
> > On that page everyone can add a project idea.
> > The requirement is that
> > 1. it must fit in the goals and mission and all of STF
> > 2. it must be about FFmpeg (IIUC non coding tasks are ok)
> 
> IIUC, they are *not* OK, unless they are a dependency of a coding task:
> 
> | Development is our primary focus, although security audits, conference
> | attendance, and other community-based events can be included in the
> | application should they be necessary.

The thing is, we can ask STF relatively easily if theres a specific task
we want funded, to check what they think about it.
features are not the primary focus of STF but the way i understood is that
it would not be impossible for them to sponsor a feature if it fits their
mission

So STF seems quite reasonable.
If you have a specific project idea that you would want funded, i or thilo
can directly ask tara. I just dont want to ask hypothetical things. As that
could annoy STF.

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Modern terrorism, a quick summary: Need oil, start war with country that
has oil, kill hundread thousand in war. Let country fall into chaos,
be surprised about raise of fundamantalists. Drop more bombs, kill more
people, be surprised about them taking revenge and drop even more bombs
and strip your own citizens of their rights and freedoms. to be continued
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20240128/fa04a3fb/attachment.sig>