> On Aug 24, 2025, at 4:11 AM, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel > <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Aug 2025, 11:56 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, < > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote: > >> Hi Kieran >> >> On Sun, Aug 24, 2025 at 07:53:45AM +0100, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel >> wrote: >>> On Sat, 23 Aug 2025, 21:33 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, < >>> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> Here is the legal advice that i was given. >>>> The GA has the full text and that is much more detailed. >>>> Iam posting the relevant parts so the whole community can see it. >>>> >>>> "a claim that there is GPLv2 code in a file of >>>> FFmpeg origin that has the LGPLv2.1 license would be a breach of the >>>> FFmpeg's >>>> LGPLv2.1 license. While section 3 of the LGPLv2.1 would have allowed >> him >>>> to >>>> take the original FFmpeg files and change the license for them to >> GPLv2, >>>> he >>>> didn't follow the necessary steps to effectively change the license. >> So >>>> the >>>> original code he is building from is still under LGPLv2.1. Since code >>>> contributions to a copyleft work have to be under the /same /license >> as >>>> the >>>> code you are contributing to (Section 2(c), "You must cause the whole >> of >>>> the >>>> work to be licensed at no charge to all third parties under the terms >> of >>>> this >>>> License"), Paul's contributions to LGPLv2.1 files are under the >> LGPLv2.1 >>>> license because he didn't exercise the option to change them to GPLv2 >>>> first. A >>>> claim otherwise would be admitting he is in breach of the FFmpeg >> license." >>>> >>>> "You can safely assume that any new file he created with a license >>>> identifier in the file of LGPLv.2.1 is under the LGPLv2.1 license." >>>> >>>> "Paul's response to your use of his code may be to relicense his code >> under >>>> the AGPL,* but he cannot change the license retroactively - you would >>>> have to >>>> accommodate the AGPL license for any later changes you adopt, but not >> for >>>> any >>>> code you are using from before a license change." >>>> >>>> thx >>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>> >>> Can you confirm the FFlabs lawyer said something different? >> >> I cannot confirm this. I dont remember ever seeing the reply or the >> question. >> >> My communication with the FFlabs lawyer was through a intermediary >> developer, >> who was very busy and the mails where also terse >> >> IIRC i also had to ask multiple times to get any awnser >> > > Translation: The FFlabs lawyer didn't agree with my agenda and so I went > and found one that did.
In all serious matters, that’s called due diligence. — Baptiste _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
