[FFmpeg-devel] Apache licensed AMR library, patches

Diego Biurrun diego
Wed Apr 15 19:57:09 CEST 2009

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 07:55:34PM +0200, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 07:35:54PM +0300, Martin Storsj? wrote:
> > - The license of the codec code is Apache 2.0, which unfortunately isn't
> >   (L)GPL2 compatible, afaik. It is compatible with (L)GPL3 though, and
> >   it's at least legally redistributable, in contrast to the current
> >   libamr-nb/wb.
> Does it matter much? We would only be linking against those, so the only
> case where I can see it matter is distributing a GPL v2-only application
> together with libamr libraries.
> I admit that there might be a bit of a problem if the AMR code could be
> unintentionally linked in statically, but otherwise it would only be a
> conflict between libamr and some other non-FFmpeg code and only if
> distributed together, so does it concern us?
> I admit this argument would have applied to the current libamr code,
> too...
> Of course it would also be possible to ask if the code be dual-licensed
> as GPLv2+Apache or not...

You have the widespread but confused opinion that static or dynamic
linking makes a difference.  It does not.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list