Luca Barbato <[email protected]> writes:

> On 07/19/2012 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 03:38:38PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote :
>>> The SFLC lawyer said the libfdk-aac license looked (l)gpl-incompatible
>>> to him.
>> 
>> Well, I am sad, but not surprised.
>> 
>
> I'd like to have a better understanding
>
> fdk:
>
> Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> modification, are permitted without
> payment of copyright license fees provided that you satisfy the
> following conditions:
>
> (A)
> You must retain the complete text of this software license in
> redistributions of the FDK AAC Codec or
> your modifications thereto in source code form.

This is normal and similar to BSD clause 1.

> (B)
> You must retain the complete text of this software license in the
> documentation and/or other materials
> provided with redistributions of the FDK AAC Codec or your modifications
> thereto in binary form.

This is similar to BSD clause 2.

> You must make available free of charge copies of the complete source
> code of the FDK AAC Codec and your modifications thereto to recipients
> of copies in binary form.

This could be seen to be an additional restriction compared to (L)GPL 1:

  You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, [...].

It could also be argued that the "free of charge" requirement applies
only to the source code as such and not to the transfer thereof.

> (C)
> The name of Fraunhofer may not be used to endorse or promote products
> derived from this library without
> prior written permission.

This is the BSD non-endorsement clause with a few words removed.

> (D)
> You may not charge copyright license fees for anyone to use, copy or
> distribute the FDK AAC Codec
> software or your modifications thereto.

This is LGPL 2c in part.  LGPL adds "under the terms of this License."

> (E)
> Your modified versions of the FDK AAC Codec must carry prominent notices
> stating that you changed the software
> and the date of any change.

This is LGPL 2b.

> For modified versions of the FDK AAC Codec, the term "Fraunhofer FDK
> AAC Codec Library for Android" must be replaced by the term
> "Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library
> for Android."

This restriction is probably not compatible with (L)GPL.  Naming
restrictions are cited as rendering the Apache-1.1 and PHP licences
GPL-incompatible.

> Currently the mismatch is (E) more than (D) in my eyes.
>
> D is a match for lgpl-2.1 2. c
>
>     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.

Agreed.

> The second part of E is a stronger version of the non-endorsement clause
> from bsd (that is compatible) so I'm not sure it could be considered an
> additional restriction.

I'm afraid the FSF is stricter in its interpretation than you are.

> Could we have a specific detail on which section clashes?

+1

-- 
Måns Rullgård
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to