Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Ronald S. Bultje (12019-09-21): > I take that back, there's a COPYING that addresses this: > > https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/docs/COPYING You are not looking at the relevant file: https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/libs/libg722_1/COPYING Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Hi, On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:53 AM Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:05 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos > wrote: > >> Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 16:51 Uhr schrieb Ronald S. Bultje >> : >> >> > So it appears, from the discussion (..), that although there is source >> > code, it is not actually "open" in the sense that it's not >> redistributable >> > (at least not explicitly so) or modifiable? If I were hosting a copy on, >> > say, github (or Debian), I'd be in legal trouble with this Freeswitch >> > company? >> >> (Afaik) Freeswitch is a distributor of binaries based on FFmpeg's and >> Polycom's source code. Freeswitch also hosts Polycom's source code. >> >> It appears to me that Freeswitch claims that while libg7221 is not a >> Free library (and has a license incompatible with the GPL), it is >> "open source" and can be distributed. > > > Hm... Right, OK, so the question is indeed going to hinge on whether that > is true or not. I suggest we open a github issue/request with exactly that > question. :-). > I take that back, there's a COPYING that addresses this: https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/docs/COPYING Seems relatively sane to me? Ronald ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Hi, On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 11:05 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 16:51 Uhr schrieb Ronald S. Bultje > : > > > So it appears, from the discussion (..), that although there is source > > code, it is not actually "open" in the sense that it's not > redistributable > > (at least not explicitly so) or modifiable? If I were hosting a copy on, > > say, github (or Debian), I'd be in legal trouble with this Freeswitch > > company? > > (Afaik) Freeswitch is a distributor of binaries based on FFmpeg's and > Polycom's source code. Freeswitch also hosts Polycom's source code. > > It appears to me that Freeswitch claims that while libg7221 is not a > Free library (and has a license incompatible with the GPL), it is > "open source" and can be distributed. Hm... Right, OK, so the question is indeed going to hinge on whether that is true or not. I suggest we open a github issue/request with exactly that question. :-). Ronald ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 16:51 Uhr schrieb Ronald S. Bultje : > So it appears, from the discussion (..), that although there is source > code, it is not actually "open" in the sense that it's not redistributable > (at least not explicitly so) or modifiable? If I were hosting a copy on, > say, github (or Debian), I'd be in legal trouble with this Freeswitch > company? (Afaik) Freeswitch is a distributor of binaries based on FFmpeg's and Polycom's source code. Freeswitch also hosts Polycom's source code. It appears to me that Freeswitch claims that while libg7221 is not a Free library (and has a license incompatible with the GPL), it is "open source" and can be distributed. > That's a serious issue, and I'd tend to agree with Nicolas we then > probably don't want to link to such code... I still wonder what the difference between the libraries that are only allowed to be used with a patent license is... Carl Eugen PS: In case this isn't obvious: We should of course improve our existing related decoder instead of linking a non-free library. I just believe that the used argumentation is surprisingly weak. And I still wonder why the mentioned patch wasn't published for interested parties... ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Hi, On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 10:07 AM Nicolas George wrote: > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > I now wonder if this isn't much nicer than "You may use this FDK AAC > > Codec software or modifications thereto only for purposes that are > > authorized by appropriate patent licenses." > > (In the sense that it doesn't try to conceal the true terms) > > It is not "nicer", it is incompetent. If you read the whole COPYING file > from libg722_1: > > > https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/libs/libg722_1/COPYING > > you realize is is not actually a license: is does not contain anything > that gives the authorization to use their code. > > Compare to the license of fdk-aac, which is proper legalese, gives > explicitly the right to use the code, and has been vetted by Debian. OK, hold on guys, wait. I had to read this 3x and it took me a while to get to this point (in my head). Others may be similarly confused. So it appears, from the discussion (..), that although there is source code, it is not actually "open" in the sense that it's not redistributable (at least not explicitly so) or modifiable? If I were hosting a copy on, say, github (or Debian), I'd be in legal trouble with this Freeswitch company? That's a serious issue, and I'd tend to agree with Nicolas we then probably don't want to link to such code... Or do I misunderstand? Ronald ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > And again, you cut the relevant part: > Are you maybe less interested in arguments than you claim? > Or just having a bad day? I am having a bad day because I find this very discussion with you very annoying. If you have anything to add to the discussion, do it in a self-contained, fully documented way. For now, I consider the matter settled: lacking a proper license, we cannot even consider including this library. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 16:25 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > I believe you misunderstand. > > You are entitled to your beliefs. Let us discuss arguments on this > mailing-list. > > Can we close the subject now? And again, you cut the relevant part: Are you maybe less interested in arguments than you claim? Or just having a bad day? Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > Interesting how different we interpret the licenses. There should be no interpreting a license: it is a legal document, what counts is what is written explicitly. > I believe you misunderstand. You are entitled to your beliefs. Let us discuss arguments on this mailing-list. Can we close the subject now? Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 16:07 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > I now wonder if this isn't much nicer than "You may use this FDK AAC > > Codec software or modifications thereto only for purposes that are > > authorized by appropriate patent licenses." > > (In the sense that it doesn't try to conceal the true terms) > > It is not "nicer", it is incompetent. If you read the whole COPYING file > from libg722_1: > > https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/libs/libg722_1/COPYING > > you realize is is not actually a license: is does not contain anything > that gives the authorization to use their code. > > Compare to the license of fdk-aac, which is proper legalese, gives > explicitly the right to use the code, and has been vetted by Debian. Interesting how different we interpret the licenses. > > Anyway, the more important question is how to deal with Freeswitch. > > Not accept their code unless they fix the license. Easy. I believe you misunderstand. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > I now wonder if this isn't much nicer than "You may use this FDK AAC > Codec software or modifications thereto only for purposes that are > authorized by appropriate patent licenses." > (In the sense that it doesn't try to conceal the true terms) It is not "nicer", it is incompetent. If you read the whole COPYING file from libg722_1: https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/libs/libg722_1/COPYING you realize is is not actually a license: is does not contain anything that gives the authorization to use their code. Compare to the license of fdk-aac, which is proper legalese, gives explicitly the right to use the code, and has been vetted by Debian. > Anyway, the more important question is how to deal with Freeswitch. Not accept their code unless they fix the license. Easy. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 15:19 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > I did and I ask you. > > Please tell me how you can think that "require the licencing of patents > from Polycom" is compatible with "shall not restrict any party from > selling or giving away the software"? I now wonder if this isn't much nicer than "You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only for purposes that are authorized by appropriate patent licenses." (In the sense that it doesn't try to conceal the true terms) Anyway, the more important question is how to deal with Freeswitch. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > I did and I ask you. Please tell me how you can think that "require the licencing of patents from Polycom" is compatible with "shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software"? > Note that in this case, cutting the remaining message seems not ideal. Wasting my time and the time of everybody still reading this thread is even less ideal. Admit you are ill-documented about software licenses, read about it a lot. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 15:11 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > But I wonder now which specific part of the OSI definition is not met > > by libg7221 in your opinion? > > Read the license, read the OSD. I did and I ask you. Note that in this case, cutting the remaining message seems not ideal. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > But I wonder now which specific part of the OSI definition is not met > by libg7221 in your opinion? Read the license, read the OSD. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 15:03 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > The FSF does make a difference between open-source software and > > free software, I believe they are more qualified than you are. > > The FSF is known to make a fuss about minute details. But in this case > you are wrong and I was right. Please read about it. The OSI definition - that supports your point - is the definition that the FSF - which defined the licenses we are using - refuses. But I wonder now which specific part of the OSI definition is not met by libg7221 in your opinion? Note that your answer will most likely not be shared by the Freeswitch people who apparently distribute binaries based on libg7221... (I have neither downloaded nor used Freeswitch, afaict thay may just offer libg7221 as additional source.) Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > The FSF does make a difference between open-source software and > free software, I believe they are more qualified than you are. The FSF is known to make a fuss about minute details. But in this case you are wrong and I was right. Please read about it. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 14:48 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > This is obviously not true as there are licenses that - for example - > > only allow non-commercial distribution. > > They are therefore not Open Source. You obviously have acquired less > documentation about the subject than me: I ask that you either trust > that I am right or take the time to check by yourself. But please stop > assuming you are informed. Thank you (again)! The FSF does make a difference between open-source software and free software, I believe they are more qualified than you are. Thank you for your enlightenment, Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > This is obviously not true as there are licenses that - for example - > only allow non-commercial distribution. They are therefore not Open Source. You obviously have acquired less documentation about the subject than me: I ask that you either trust that I am right or take the time to check by yourself. But please stop assuming you are informed. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 14:43 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > There is almost no practical difference between Free Software > and Open Source. This is obviously not true as there are licenses that - for example - only allow non-commercial distribution. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > Thanks for the repeated ad-hominem Repeated? > but are you sure that you are not > mixing up Free Software and Open Source? Are you sure you know the difference between Free Software and Open Source? This question shows that you do not. There is almost no practical difference between Free Software and Open Source. The main difference is point of view and emphasis. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 14:35 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > Both libraries are open-source > > Please re-read my mail from 13:41:34 +0200 and the license I pointed at > 13:55:53 +0200. > > And just in case you managed to stay for more than a decade contributing > to an open-source project without knowing what it means, read the Open > Source Definition. Thanks for the repeated ad-hominem but are you sure that you are not mixing up Free Software and Open Source? Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > Both libraries are open-source Please re-read my mail from 13:41:34 +0200 and the license I pointed at 13:55:53 +0200. And just in case you managed to stay for more than a decade contributing to an open-source project without knowing what it means, read the Open Source Definition. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 14:29 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > So what is the difference between open-source software with a license > > incompatible > > with the GPL and an open-source software with a license incompatible > > with the GPL? > > Please fix your question. As it is, it is absurd. What is - in your opinion - the difference between libg7221 and libfdk-aac from FFmpeg's GPL license point-of-view? Both libraries are open-source, and both libraries have licenses incompatible with the GPL. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > So what is the difference between open-source software with a license > incompatible > with the GPL and an open-source software with a license incompatible > with the GPL? Please fix your question. As it is, it is absurd. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 13:56 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > Could you elaborate? > > I can point you to the license file: > > https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/libs/libg722_1/COPYING So what is the difference between open-source software with a license incompatible with the GPL and an open-source software with a license incompatible with the GPL? Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > Could you elaborate? I can point you to the license file: https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/master/libs/libg722_1/COPYING Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Sa., 21. Sept. 2019 um 13:41 Uhr schrieb Nicolas George : > > Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > > Non-free originally came to be because of fdk-aac, which is open > > > source but doesn't meet the requirements of the (L)GPL. > > How is that different from libg7221? > > libg7221 is not open-source, AFAICT. Could you elaborate? Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Carl Eugen Hoyos (12019-09-21): > > Non-free originally came to be because of fdk-aac, which is open > > source but doesn't meet the requirements of the (L)GPL. > How is that different from libg7221? libg7221 is not open-source, AFAICT. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Do., 19. Sept. 2019 um 09:10 Uhr schrieb Tomas Härdin : > Non-free originally came to be because of fdk-aac, which is open > source but doesn't meet the requirements of the (L)GPL. How is that different from libg7221? Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
2019년 9월 20일 (금) 오후 10:49, Nicolas George 님이 작성: > Hyun Yoo (12019-09-20): > > So non-free codec should be in ffmpeg internally/externally > > and fdk-aac is an exception. got it. > > No, you did not get it. fdk-aac is not an exception, it is open-source. > Sorry for typo. 'non-free should NOT be in ffmpeg' > > I don't know about relicense thing...but I did contacted > FreeSwitch/Polycom. > > I sent email to Steve Underwood(author of libg722_1) and Brian > > West(one of FreeSwitch founder) > > and they said I can use the libg722_1 in freeswitch repo. > > This is too vague. > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas George > ___ > 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". ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Hyun Yoo (12019-09-20): > So non-free codec should be in ffmpeg internally/externally > and fdk-aac is an exception. got it. No, you did not get it. fdk-aac is not an exception, it is open-source. > I don't know about relicense thing...but I did contacted FreeSwitch/Polycom. > I sent email to Steve Underwood(author of libg722_1) and Brian > West(one of FreeSwitch founder) > and they said I can use the libg722_1 in freeswitch repo. This is too vague. Regards, -- Nicolas George signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 4:10 PM Tomas Härdin wrote: > > tor 2019-09-19 klockan 13:58 +0900 skrev Hyun Yoo: > > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:28 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > > Am Di., 17. Sept. 2019 um 02:37 Uhr schrieb Hyun Yoo > > > : > > > > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > > > > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > > > > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) > > > > > > Please provide your patch by either sending it to this mailing list > > > or putting it somewhere so it is kept for interested people (after > > > the kind reactions you received). > > > > Let me sum up. > > Non-free codecs are not allowed in ffmpeg codebase except > > linked as external lib like fdk-aac (added to EXTERNAL_LIBRARY_NONFREE_LIST) > > Non-free originally came to be because of fdk-aac, which is open source > but doesn't meet the requirements of the (L)GPL. Some have taken this > to mean that we should include wrappers for proprietary codecs, which > has also been done (arguably by mistake) for things like NDI. This has > led to much friction.. So non-free codec should be in ffmpeg internally/externally and fdk-aac is an exception. got it. > > I think we should try and talk to FreeSwitch and/or Polycom and see if > we can get them to relicense to something suitable. If Polycom are > worried about competitors, perhaps they would agree to dual license > under the AGPL? > > /Tomas I don't know about relicense thing...but I did contacted FreeSwitch/Polycom. I sent email to Steve Underwood(author of libg722_1) and Brian West(one of FreeSwitch founder) and they said I can use the libg722_1 in freeswitch repo. I also left note in polycom.com - 'Contact Us' and still waiting for answer. ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
tor 2019-09-19 klockan 13:58 +0900 skrev Hyun Yoo: > On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:28 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > Am Di., 17. Sept. 2019 um 02:37 Uhr schrieb Hyun Yoo > > : > > > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > > > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > > > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) > > > > Please provide your patch by either sending it to this mailing list > > or putting it somewhere so it is kept for interested people (after > > the kind reactions you received). > > Let me sum up. > Non-free codecs are not allowed in ffmpeg codebase except > linked as external lib like fdk-aac (added to EXTERNAL_LIBRARY_NONFREE_LIST) Non-free originally came to be because of fdk-aac, which is open source but doesn't meet the requirements of the (L)GPL. Some have taken this to mean that we should include wrappers for proprietary codecs, which has also been done (arguably by mistake) for things like NDI. This has led to much friction.. I think we should try and talk to FreeSwitch and/or Polycom and see if we can get them to relicense to something suitable. If Polycom are worried about competitors, perhaps they would agree to dual license under the AGPL? /Tomas ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 7:28 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > Am Di., 17. Sept. 2019 um 02:37 Uhr schrieb Hyun Yoo : > > > > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) > > Please provide your patch by either sending it to this mailing list > or putting it somewhere so it is kept for interested people (after > the kind reactions you received). Let me sum up. Non-free codecs are not allowed in ffmpeg codebase except linked as external lib like fdk-aac (added to EXTERNAL_LIBRARY_NONFREE_LIST) ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Di., 17. Sept. 2019 um 02:37 Uhr schrieb Hyun Yoo : > > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) Please provide your patch by either sending it to this mailing list or putting it somewhere so it is kept for interested people (after the kind reactions you received). Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
Am Di., 17. Sept. 2019 um 10:14 Uhr schrieb Andrey Semashev : > > On 2019-09-17 03:29, Hyun Yoo wrote: > > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) > > I believe, the correct upstream link is > > https://freeswitch.org/stash/projects/SD/repos/libg7221/browse Do I understand correctly that freeswitch is distributing binaries based on different open-source software (including FFmpeg) and this G.722.1 library? Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:00 AM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > > > > Am 18.09.2019 um 10:52 schrieb Paul B Mahol : > > > >> On 9/18/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Am 18.09.2019 um 07:34 schrieb Hyun Yoo : > >>> > >>> How can I mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in configure? > >> > >> Search for “NONFREE” in configure. > > > > > > Not needed. NONFREE decoders are not alowed in out codebase. > > Looking at the codebase, this does not seem correct. > We don't have a single proprietary software decoder/encoder in avcodec. The only non-free en/decoder we have at all is fdk-aac, which has an open-source license, but is not deemed entirely compatible with the GPL. - Hendrik ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
> Am 18.09.2019 um 10:52 schrieb Paul B Mahol : > >> On 9/18/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >> >> >> >>> Am 18.09.2019 um 07:34 schrieb Hyun Yoo : >>> >>> How can I mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in configure? >> >> Search for “NONFREE” in configure. > > > Not needed. NONFREE decoders are not alowed in out codebase. Looking at the codebase, this does not seem correct. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On 9/18/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > > >> Am 18.09.2019 um 07:34 schrieb Hyun Yoo : >> >> How can I mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in configure? > > Search for “NONFREE” in configure. Not needed. NONFREE decoders are not alowed in out codebase. > > Carl Eugen > ___ > 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". ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
> Am 18.09.2019 um 07:34 schrieb Hyun Yoo : > > How can I mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in configure? Search for “NONFREE” in configure. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On 9/18/19, Hyun Yoo wrote: > According to wiki, g.722.1 is not variants of G.722 and > they use different patented compression technologies. > > There is a reference code in ITU-T > https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.722.1-200505-I/en > and the freeswitch version is a wrapper with cleaner api. > (I recently contacted the freeswitch guy and got permission) > so I think the source code is ok to use. > > The codec itself is licensed by Polycom so I agreed it should be notified > to user. > How can I mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in configure? > Any document about that? > > I also found old thread about "Differences between Cook and G.722.1" > https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2007-May/034060.html > I can find CODEC_ID_COOK but not G722_1 so maybe they turned out to be > different. Non-free codecs libs are not allowed in codebase. Sorry. > > 2019년 9월 17일 (화) 오후 5:27, Moritz Barsnick 님이 작성: > >> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:52:48 +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >> > > But that said: ffmpeg already has a native G.722 encoder (and >> > > decoder), >> > >> > See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.722.1 >> > The numbering... >> >> Yes, my next paragraph referred to that. But I just figured out that >> G.722 was apparently differently licensed, and therefore it was >> probably quite straightforward to port libg722 to ffmpeg, unlike this >> G.722.1 code or codec. >> >> > (The library is non-free and we cannot change that.) >> >> Indeed. >> >> Moritz >> ___ >> 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". > ___ > 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". ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
According to wiki, g.722.1 is not variants of G.722 and they use different patented compression technologies. There is a reference code in ITU-T https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.722.1-200505-I/en and the freeswitch version is a wrapper with cleaner api. (I recently contacted the freeswitch guy and got permission) so I think the source code is ok to use. The codec itself is licensed by Polycom so I agreed it should be notified to user. How can I mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in configure? Any document about that? I also found old thread about "Differences between Cook and G.722.1" https://lists.ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2007-May/034060.html I can find CODEC_ID_COOK but not G722_1 so maybe they turned out to be different. 2019년 9월 17일 (화) 오후 5:27, Moritz Barsnick 님이 작성: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:52:48 +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > > But that said: ffmpeg already has a native G.722 encoder (and decoder), > > > > See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.722.1 > > The numbering... > > Yes, my next paragraph referred to that. But I just figured out that > G.722 was apparently differently licensed, and therefore it was > probably quite straightforward to port libg722 to ffmpeg, unlike this > G.722.1 code or codec. > > > (The library is non-free and we cannot change that.) > > Indeed. > > Moritz > ___ > 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". ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:52:48 +0200, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > But that said: ffmpeg already has a native G.722 encoder (and decoder), > > See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.722.1 > The numbering... Yes, my next paragraph referred to that. But I just figured out that G.722 was apparently differently licensed, and therefore it was probably quite straightforward to port libg722 to ffmpeg, unlike this G.722.1 code or codec. > (The library is non-free and we cannot change that.) Indeed. Moritz ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On 2019-09-17 03:29, Hyun Yoo wrote: I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) I believe, the correct upstream link is https://freeswitch.org/stash/projects/SD/repos/libg7221/browse The GitHub project is a mirror. ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
> Am 17.09.2019 um 09:43 schrieb Moritz Barsnick : > But that said: ffmpeg already has a native G.722 encoder (and decoder), See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.722.1 The numbering... Carl Eugen (The library is non-free and we cannot change that.) ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 09:29:54 +0900, Hyun Yoo wrote: > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) > > But I'm not sure about the license issue > because g.722.1 is licensed by Polycom(royalty-free) > > Getting permission is my(commiter) job? or user(who link and compile)'s job? I believe (but IANAL) all that licence file (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/blob/1220bbcff2fe733f40c9eae0f26a91062f419fee/libs/libg722_1/COPYING) says is that the G.722.1 *codec* is to be licensed, and the code implementation is "free to use". Is this the actual reference implementation quoted in that file? Really bad wording, if you ask me. But that said: ffmpeg already has a native G.722 encoder (and decoder), and even the same author (Steve Underwood) is credited in it. Perhaps it was even derived from the same sources as the libg722_1 sources. Why would you need this external implementation? Because it provides G.722.1 versus just G.722? Could that functionality not easily be ported/merged to ffmpeg, assuming the same licensing conditions as assumed for the G.722 implementation? Cheers, Moritz ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
> Am 17.09.2019 um 02:29 schrieb Hyun Yoo : > > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) > > But I'm not sure about the license issue > because g.722.1 is licensed by Polycom(royalty-free) Mark the new external codec as “nonfree” in FFmpeg’s configure file. Carl Eugen ___ 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".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
tis 2019-09-17 klockan 09:29 +0900 skrev Hyun Yoo: > I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 > as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable- > libg722_1) > (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1 > ) > > But I'm not sure about the license issue > because g.722.1 is licensed by Polycom(royalty-free) The software license sounds like it's non-free > Getting permission is my(commiter) job? or user(who link and > compile)'s job? If FFmpeg could get the appropriate paperwork to relicense it under say LGPL that would be great. Else it would be up to the user We've had some discussions before about non-free codec wrappers in the codebase, and most developers are not very fond of them. Perhaps an effort to implement our own encoder would be worthwhile? The patents are a non-issue for European users /Tomas ___ 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".
[FFmpeg-devel] Is it ok to add G.722.1 decoder as external lib?
I implemented a g.722.1 decoder by linking FreeSwitch's libg722_1 as external lib like libilbc, libspeex(ex. configure --enable-libg722_1) (https://github.com/traviscross/freeswitch/tree/master/libs/libg722_1) But I'm not sure about the license issue because g.722.1 is licensed by Polycom(royalty-free) Getting permission is my(commiter) job? or user(who link and compile)'s job? ___ 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".
