| Message ID | 201704010120.37843.cehoyos@ag.or.at |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
On 1 April 2017 at 00:20, Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos@ag.or.at> wrote: > Hi! > > To the best of my knowledge, decklink is a non-free dependency. > > Please comment, Carl Eugen > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > > IANAL, but this doesn't seem like a non-free license: Copyright (c) 2016 Blackmagic Design Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person or organization obtaining a copy of the software and accompanying documentation covered by this license (the "Software") to use, reproduce, display, distribute, execute, and transmit the Software, and to prepare derivative works of the Software, and to permit third-parties to whom the Software is furnished to do so, all subject to the following: The copyright notices in the Software and this entire statement, including the above license grant, this restriction and the following disclaimer, must be included in all copies of the Software, in whole or in part, and all derivative works of the Software, unless such copies or derivative works are solely in the form of machine-executable object code generated by a source language processor. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS OR ANYONE DISTRIBUTING THE SOFTWARE BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 2:18 PM, Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 1 April 2017 at 00:20, Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos@ag.or.at> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> To the best of my knowledge, decklink is a non-free dependency. >> >> Please comment, Carl Eugen >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ffmpeg-devel mailing list >> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org >> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel >> >> > > IANAL, but this doesn't seem like a non-free license: > > Copyright (c) 2016 Blackmagic Design > > Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person or organization > obtaining a copy of the software and accompanying documentation covered by > this license (the "Software") to use, reproduce, display, distribute, > execute, and transmit the Software, and to prepare derivative works of the > Software, and to permit third-parties to whom the Software is furnished to > do so, all subject to the following: > > The copyright notices in the Software and this entire statement, including > the above license grant, this restriction and the following disclaimer, > must be included in all copies of the Software, in whole or in part, and > all derivative works of the Software, unless such copies or derivative > works are solely in the form of machine-executable object code generated by > a source language processor. > > THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR > IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, > FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT > SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS OR ANYONE DISTRIBUTING THE SOFTWARE BE LIABLE > FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, > ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER > DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. This is the Boost Software license, very similar to BSD/MIT, so if that license is all that matters, its obviously fine. - Hendrik
On 1 April 2017 at 14:03, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is the Boost Software license, very similar to BSD/MIT, so if > that license is all that matters, its obviously fine. > > Just downloaded the latest 10.8.5 SDK and checked every file inside "Blackmagic DeckLink SDK 10.8.5\Win\include". All files contain this same license with only the copyright year changing and a couple extra newlines on some.
2017-04-01 16:37 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com>: > On 1 April 2017 at 14:03, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> This is the Boost Software license, very similar to BSD/MIT, so if >> that license is all that matters, its obviously fine. >> >> > Just downloaded the latest 10.8.5 SDK and checked every file inside > "Blackmagic DeckLink SDK 10.8.5\Win\include". All files contain this > same license with only the copyright year changing and a couple extra > newlines on some. First: Are you talking about the library or the headers? I was talking about a non-free library that can be used with LGPL but not GPL. (Assuming the library really is closed-source) Secondly: How did you download it? At Debian, it was claimed that although the headers contain these BSD headers, you had to agree not to distribute them to get the SDK in the first place: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839941 So even the headers are non-free. Carl Eugen
On 3 April 2017 at 10:56, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg@gmail.com> wrote: > 2017-04-01 16:37 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com>: > > On 1 April 2017 at 14:03, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> This is the Boost Software license, very similar to BSD/MIT, so if > >> that license is all that matters, its obviously fine. > >> > >> > > Just downloaded the latest 10.8.5 SDK and checked every file inside > > "Blackmagic DeckLink SDK 10.8.5\Win\include". All files contain this > > same license with only the copyright year changing and a couple extra > > newlines on some. > > First: Are you talking about the library or the headers? > I was talking about a non-free library that can be used with > LGPL but not GPL. (Assuming the library really is closed-source) > I was talking about the headers, which is the only part that matters to FFmpeg. > > Secondly: > How did you download it? > At Debian, it was claimed that although the headers contain these > BSD headers, you had to agree not to distribute them to get > the SDK in the first place: > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=839941 > So even the headers are non-free. > > The SDK probably isn't redistributable due to EULA, sure, but if all relevant files specifically contain Boost license don't they override the EULA?
Le quartidi 14 germinal, an CCXXV, Ricardo Constantino a écrit : > I was talking about the headers, which is the only part that matters to > FFmpeg. I do not know the specifics, so just for references: The license that matter is the license of ALL the files that are needed at build time. > The SDK probably isn't redistributable due to EULA, sure, but if all > relevant files specifically contain Boost license don't they override > the EULA? No. You promised something (not to distribute the files) and got something in exchange (the SDK). If the license were a copyleft license, then the people who are setting the EULA would be violating that copyleft. But that would be an issue between them and the copyright holders of the copylefted files, you are not allowed to judge that by yourself. And this particular license does not looks like copyleft to me. Regards,
2017-04-03 13:34 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com>: > On 3 April 2017 at 10:56, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 2017-04-01 16:37 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com>: >> > On 1 April 2017 at 14:03, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> This is the Boost Software license, very similar to BSD/MIT, so if >> >> that license is all that matters, its obviously fine. >> >> >> >> >> > Just downloaded the latest 10.8.5 SDK and checked every file inside >> > "Blackmagic DeckLink SDK 10.8.5\Win\include". All files contain this >> > same license with only the copyright year changing and a couple extra >> > newlines on some. >> >> First: Are you talking about the library or the headers? >> I was talking about a non-free library that can be used with >> LGPL but not GPL. (Assuming the library really is closed-source) > > I was talking about the headers, which is the only part that > matters to FFmpeg. This is not true (it would mean that you would only have to release your headers under GPL to create a distributable binary using GPL software linked against non-free libraries). But since it appears correct that it is not legal to distribute the header files either, I will apply the configure patch tomorrow. Carl Eugen
2017-04-03 18:40 GMT+02:00 Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg@gmail.com>: > 2017-04-03 13:34 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com>: >> On 3 April 2017 at 10:56, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 2017-04-01 16:37 GMT+02:00 Ricardo Constantino <wiiaboo@gmail.com>: >>> > On 1 April 2017 at 14:03, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> This is the Boost Software license, very similar to BSD/MIT, so if >>> >> that license is all that matters, its obviously fine. >>> >> >>> >> >>> > Just downloaded the latest 10.8.5 SDK and checked every file inside >>> > "Blackmagic DeckLink SDK 10.8.5\Win\include". All files contain this >>> > same license with only the copyright year changing and a couple extra >>> > newlines on some. >>> >>> First: Are you talking about the library or the headers? >>> I was talking about a non-free library that can be used with >>> LGPL but not GPL. (Assuming the library really is closed-source) >> >> I was talking about the headers, which is the only part that >> matters to FFmpeg. > > This is not true (it would mean that you would only have to > release your headers under GPL to create a distributable > binary using GPL software linked against non-free libraries). > > But since it appears correct that it is not legal to distribute > the header files either, I will apply the configure patch tomorrow. Finally pushed and backported. Carl Eugen
diff --git a/configure b/configure index 8b4921b..06f991e 100755 --- a/configure +++ b/configure @@ -1512,6 +1512,7 @@ EXTERNAL_LIBRARY_GPL_LIST=" " EXTERNAL_LIBRARY_NONFREE_LIST=" + decklink libfdk_aac openssl " @@ -1536,7 +1537,6 @@ EXTERNAL_LIBRARY_LIST=" avisynth chromaprint crystalhd - decklink gcrypt gnutls jni
Hi! To the best of my knowledge, decklink is a non-free dependency. Please comment, Carl Eugen From bc95eac06af339535037bba329d39026c3f87a3f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos@ag.or.at> Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 01:18:18 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] configure: Fix decklink license dependency --- configure | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)