> On 11 Jan 2016, at 12:47, Carl Eugen Hoyos <[email protected]> wrote: > > Info || Non-Lethal Applications <info@...> writes: > >> I have a question about the DNxHD/VC-3 decoder included >> in libavcodec. I’d like to use it in a commercial product >> and I’m not sure if this is allowed. > > What makes you think that we distribute software that we > don't want you to use?
My point is not that I’m not allowed to use it at all but the part COMMERCIAL. >> It was my understanding that the VC-3 codec is open >> source so I thought I could use it. > > libavcodec is open source software distributed under the > terms of the LGPL: Usage is not limited (except for "no > warranty") but distribution is only allowed under the > terms of the LGPL. I read this: https://lab.apertus.org/T91 which is reportedly an AVID original email. An excerpt: "A patent license is required for use of VC-3 as it falls under the DNxHD patents. The patent license grants you the right to use and even distribute the technology but, in no way can you reference the technology in the product as Avid, Avid DNxHD, DNX, etc. when it is from an open source. The use of VC-3 falls under the same schedule of royalty reporting under the patent license. In order to market your product as DNxHD from VC-3, Avid would need to test the product and a $10,000 fee for testing would be applied.” Can you or anyone else tell me how this “patent license” is handled with FFmpeg and LGPL? Also, this doesn’t differentiate between encoder/decoder as well as open source or commercial. This led me to think that all use of VC-3 might possibly be restricted. It also specifically names FFmpeg: "Any ffmpeg implementation is considered a subset of Avid DNxHD and would be subject to testing verification in addition to the royalties.” What ‘royalties’ are they talking about? Any insight is much appreciated! Best, Flo
_______________________________________________ Libav-user mailing list [email protected] http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-user
