Hi Nicolas

On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 08:42:20PM +0100, Nicolas George via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-10-16):
> > I like that this would result in a steady income stream.
> > I think its a good idea, and iam happy to provide companies with
> > extended security support on old releases.
> 
> I think it is naïve for nerds like us to expect being able to interact
> with companies and coming out ahead. They would sic their lawyers on us
> to make sure they have warranties that we deliver what they want.

We have people in the community who have experience with company stuff


[...]
> > I mean, We have companies who want releases (cant say who and what
> > exactly because its non public info)
> > These companies will pay for releases, so someone will continue making
> > releases. Its better if that someone is us, better for the quality of
> > releases and better for our income
> 
> Why should we care if the releases are good if we do not slap our names
> on them?
> 
> The core of the issue is that FFmpeg is a Libre Software project, not an
> Open Source project: it is before anything else the work of people in
> their free time to make beautiful code, not the work of a company that
> is planning to eventually turn a profit. This is important also for our
> own freedom to experiment, to write code differently, to take the risk
> of failing.
> 
> What you propose effectively turns FFmpeg into a company in all but
> legal status. That would be detrimental to our freedom to experiment,
> and eventually to the quality of the code. Not counting being halfway
> between two status, i.e. getting the problems of both.

I care about money, so i dont have to care about money

You can either
A. work 40h a week to make enough money to live and use the remaining time to
   build beautifull code
B. be rich enough so you can fulltime build beautifull code
C. work 40h a week building beatifull code

We want to achieve something between B and C here

If we can get about 2M$ / year in donations then maintaince of FFmpeg can be
funded.
Why do we want to fund it ? Because we need more manpower, we need people spending
more time working on FFmpeg.
If you can make it happen without $, please do

How unrealistic is funding some of the maintaince ?
Lets do a quick check, almost everyone on this planet uses FFmpeg in some form
(youtube alone has ~3 billion users)
imagine each of youtubes users gives FFmpeg 1 cent once in their life
instant 30million $
invest in S&P500, subtract inflation you get a fresh 2M$ each year.

While this is a thought experiment, if everyone who used FFmpeg gave us 1 cent
once in their life we could fund FFmpegs maintaince indefinitly. With zero
requiremets, we would be 100% free to choose what to work on.

Above is not a plan, its just to show the scale of what we need.

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The real ebay dictionary, page 1
"Used only once"    - "Some unspecified defect prevented a second use"
"In good condition" - "Can be repaird by experienced expert"
"As is" - "You wouldnt want it even if you were payed for it, if you knew ..."