My God, what a big list!JohnTHaller wrote:You'll find them listed in FFMpeg's hall of shame:
http://ffmpeg.org/shame.html
I've just noticed that XMediaRecode is in that list (and TPFC database); what should we do?
My God, what a big list!JohnTHaller wrote:You'll find them listed in FFMpeg's hall of shame:
http://ffmpeg.org/shame.html
The link 'not properly licensed' pulls up an SSL Error (untrusted security certificate) in Chromium.webfork wrote:For our purposes we could probably still list the software while making a link to the hall of shame. I'll update the XMedia page.This program is not properly licensed with some of the included libraries.
XMedia Recode does link to the source code, it's at the bottom of the 'license.txt' file.webfork wrote:a little more research shows they're violating the GPL, which is very uncool. Linking to the source code is really not difficult.
It doesn't have to be included in the distribution as long as you provide written notice that it is available and distribute it yourself using your own servers (you can't just link to someone else hosting the source). Generally, this means that you link to both the binaries and source from the same website as well as having links to the source within your binary package. Those links must be to your own servers that you pay for (or contract someone else to provide). For example, if you redistribute 7-Zip, you must also redistribute the 7-Zip source code (you can't just link to 7-Zip's source on their SourceForge project).webfork wrote:I just looked through the 7-zip distribution of VLC direct from the web site. It doesn't seem to have any source code at all. The readme file seems to say there should be an \src directory but it doesn't exist.
A quick search seems to say that FFmpeg is in VLC (http://wiki.videolan.org/FFmpeg) and the web site seems to point to a separate source code page, not any files that should presumably be inside the download.
So I don't think this "including the source code" is mandatory or VLC obviously belongs on the wall of shame as well.
We don't redistribute Google Chrome itself, we provide an installer to download and install it from Google servers. Repackaging it is a violation of their EULA (and illegal).Ruby wrote:JohnTHaller, can you share your thoughts on this:
You redistribute some apps which utilize FFmpeg in some way, i.e.
Google Chrome Portable
SMPlayer Portable
VLC Media Player Portable
None of which contain the source code to FFmpeg.
Are these apps not in violation?
It sounds like you just have to provide "clear directions" on where to find the source code, not host it on your servers. And that's only GPLv3.JohnTHaller wrote:It doesn't have to be included in the distribution as long as you provide written notice that it is available and distribute it yourself using your own servers (you can't just link to someone else hosting the source). Generally, this means that you link to both the binaries and source from the same website as well as having links to the source within your binary package. Those links must be to your own servers that you pay for (or contract someone else to provide). For example, if you redistribute 7-Zip, you must also redistribute the 7-Zip source code (you can't just link to 7-Zip's source on their SourceForge project).webfork wrote:So I don't think this "including the source code" is mandatory or VLC obviously belongs on the wall of shame as well.
The fourth section for version 2 of the license and the seventh section of version 3 require that programs distributed as pre-compiled binaries are accompanied by a copy of the source code, a written offer to distribute the source code via the same mechanism as the pre-compiled binary or the written offer to obtain the source code that you got when you received the pre-compiled binary under the GPL. The second section of version 2 and the fifth section of version 3 also require giving "all recipients a copy of this License along with the Program". Version 3 of the license allows making the source code available in additional ways in fulfillment of the seventh section. These include downloading source code from an adjacent network server or by peer-to-peer transmission, provided that is how the compiled code was available and there are "clear directions" on where to find the source code.
That's not correct. You have to distribute the source yourself according to the Free Software Foundation. Specifically:webfork wrote:It sounds like you just have to provide "clear directions" on where to find the source code, not host it on your servers. And that's only GPLv3.
There are really two reasons for this. The first is availability. So that when you distribute the binaries, you are distributing the source, and will continue to do so. That way, if the original source goes dark (offline, out of business, etc), you are still distributing the binaries as well as the source to those who got the binaries from you, so those recipients can continue to get the source even though the original provider has disappeared.I downloaded just the binary from the net. If I distribute copies, do I have to get the source and distribute that too?
Yes. The general rule is, if you distribute binaries, you must distribute the complete corresponding source code too. The exception for the case where you received a written offer for source code is quite limited.