Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Legal Advice Was: [POLL][RFC] Merge vs Cherry pick for integration of changes

[Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5096 bytes --]

Hi Kieran

On Sun, Aug 24, 2025 at 12:11:20PM +0100, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel 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.
> 
> It's funny how you are reluctant to post that lawyers opinion [because it
> didn't agree with you] when you happily leak private discussions (e.g from
> the CC) on this list all the time.
> 
> To use Anton's words "tin-pot dictator" behaviour in action.

Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2025 14:40:25 +0200
From: Jean-Baptiste Kempf <jb@videolan.org>
To: Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
Subject: Re: License question

Hello,

Lawyer says that, most likely,the COPYING file that comes after (newer) than the headers of the file prevails.
So all his changes are GPLv2. :(

BEst,

On Sat, 7 Jun 2025, at 15:31, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi jb
>
> any news ?
> have you had time to ask the lawyer ?
>
> Its bad for FFmpeg to lack features that our competitors have.
> (and thus also bad for FFlabs)
>
> librempeg has 36 decoders that FFmpeg does not have, id like to
> get these into FFmpeg and even after the lawyer reply it will
> still need likely a vote between cherry picking vs merging
>
> thx
>
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 10:34:27PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Hi jb
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 02, 2025 at 09:50:53PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > "All Librempeg modifications, and any new files
>> > not available in FFmpeg, are licensed under GPL v2, unless stated
>> > otherwise."
>> >
>> > Where is that from?
>>
>> git show paul/master:LICENSE.md
>>
>> the files themselfs contain unmodified LGPL headers
>>
>> thx
>>
>> [...]
>> --
>> Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
>>
>> I have often repented speaking, but never of holding my tongue.
>> -- Xenocrates
>
>
>
> --
> Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
>
> Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
> temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety -- Benjamin Franklin
>
> Attachments:
> * signature.asc

--
Jean-Baptiste Kempf -  President
+33 672 704 734
https://jbkempf.com/


[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

it is not once nor twice but times without number that the same ideas make
their appearance in the world. -- Aristotle

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".