[DISCUSSION] GPL violation by ratDVD?
Is ratDVD (www.ratdvd.dk) violating the GPL?, open discussions: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/215044 http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=693256#post693256 PS! I will be supprised if this isn't 'slashdotted' soon =/
Gamester17 wrote:
Is ratDVD (www.ratdvd.dk) violating the GPL?, open discussions: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/215044 http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=693256#post693256 PS! I will be supprised if this isn't 'slashdotted' soon =/
well there was a discussion on dvd-devel ML (http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=7525493&forum_id=774), and the dvdnav authors seem don't care. Without them you can't do anything. Moreover as the GPL FAQ say, you can use GPL applications in your proprietary software if they run as external process. So there'll always people trying to build complex wrapper to profit of GPL software... Matthieu
2005/7/31, matthieu castet <castet.matthieu at free.fr>:
Gamester17 wrote:
Is ratDVD (www.ratdvd.dk) violating the GPL?, open discussions: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/215044 http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=693256#post693256 PS! I will be supprised if this isn't 'slashdotted' soon =/
well there was a discussion on dvd-devel ML (http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=7525493&forum_id=774), and the dvdnav authors seem don't care. Without them you can't do anything.
Moreover as the GPL FAQ say, you can use GPL applications in your proprietary software if they run as external process. So there'll always people trying to build complex wrapper to profit of GPL software...
The criteria is actually very simple. If the non-free program depends on GPL program to work, then they are linked, thus the comersial program is in violation. It doesn't matter what interface they use and how they are connected. This also have to say that all MPlayer frontends should be (L)GPL compatable. It could be easily tested. Stop the internet connection, install and run that ratDVD. If it can play DVD without libdvdnav, then it is ok. Ivan Kalvachev iive
Ivan Kalvachev <ikalvachev at gmail.com> writes:
2005/7/31, matthieu castet <castet.matthieu at free.fr>:
Gamester17 wrote:
Is ratDVD (www.ratdvd.dk) violating the GPL?, open discussions: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/215044 http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=693256#post693256 PS! I will be supprised if this isn't 'slashdotted' soon =/
well there was a discussion on dvd-devel ML (http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=7525493&forum_id=774), and the dvdnav authors seem don't care. Without them you can't do anything.
Moreover as the GPL FAQ say, you can use GPL applications in your proprietary software if they run as external process. So there'll always people trying to build complex wrapper to profit of GPL software...
The criteria is actually very simple. If the non-free program depends on GPL program to work, then they are linked, thus the comersial program is in violation. It doesn't matter what interface they use and how they are connected.
It does matter. If the program can use a (hypothetical) drop-in replacement for a GPL component, without being recompiled or relinked, there is a dependency only an *interface*, and copyright restrictions do not cross interface boundaries.
This also have to say that all MPlayer frontends should be (L)GPL compatable.
Creating a player that is stdio compatible with mplayer is fairly trivial. Hence, no inherent dependency. -- M?ns Rullg?rd mru at inprovide.com
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 05:41:40PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
Ivan Kalvachev <ikalvachev at gmail.com> writes:
2005/7/31, matthieu castet <castet.matthieu at free.fr>:
Gamester17 wrote:
Is ratDVD (www.ratdvd.dk) violating the GPL?, open discussions: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/215044 http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=693256#post693256 PS! I will be supprised if this isn't 'slashdotted' soon =/
well there was a discussion on dvd-devel ML (http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=7525493&forum_id=774), and the dvdnav authors seem don't care. Without them you can't do anything.
Moreover as the GPL FAQ say, you can use GPL applications in your proprietary software if they run as external process. So there'll always people trying to build complex wrapper to profit of GPL software...
The criteria is actually very simple. If the non-free program depends on GPL program to work, then they are linked, thus the comersial program is in violation. It doesn't matter what interface they use and how they are connected.
It does matter. If the program can use a (hypothetical) drop-in replacement for a GPL component, without being recompiled or relinked, there is a dependency only an *interface*, and copyright restrictions do not cross interface boundaries.
It does matter, as long as the party making the proprietary program is distributing the GPL module with the intent that it be used as part of their proprietary program. In this case they are, and there is no drop-in replacement. See the objective-C case for a similar scenario in which the infringing party settled. Natrually no one is bound by the GPL if they are not distributing the GPL program and the GPL program just happens to be usable when interfaced with their proprietary program. However, when they ARE distributing the GPL program, and their product DOES NOT WORK WHATSOEVER without it, they MUST comply with the terms of the GPL. Rich
participants (5)
-
castet.matthieu＠free.fr -
dalias＠aerifal.cx -
gamester17＠xboxmediacenter.com -
ikalvachev＠gmail.com -
mru＠inprovide.com