[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025

[Cosmin Stejerean]

> On Jun 3, 2024, at 12:26 PM, Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi at remlab.net> wrote:
> 
> Le maanantaina 3. kesäkuuta 2024, 21.58.48 EEST Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-
> devel a écrit :
>> Not sure why you keep beating this dead horse.
> 
> Err, I think that it is obvious why:
> 
> 1) The questions were not answered back then. Calling the people asking 
> questions troll is not answering, it's insulting.
> 
> 2) IBC came up today, in much the same way as NAB did.

The costs or lack thereof came up today. Making accusations that it was FFmpeg in name only did not come up until you brought it up, and seems completely uncalled for.

> 
>> This is was a volunteer effort, you're welcome to volunteer for the IBC
>> booth to increase the probability of there being an FFmpeg developer
>> present at the booth at all times.
> 
> I don't know about that. I mean, I did obtain an FFmpeg booth at SCaLE. A boot 
> that Thilo unilaterally canceled because He could not attend. You know, 
> instead of asking for volunteers. And when I brought that out here, I was 
> called a troll.
> 

I have no idea what happened with SCaLE. However if you put something together in future years I might be able to volunteer, it's a relatively short drive for me from Vegas.

The situation with Thilo cancelling the booth sounds like a miscommunication, you may want to discuss this directly with Thilo?

In any case, don't let that prevent you from volunteering at IBC if that's something you're interested in.

> And the CC apparently find that both the cancellation and insults were, at 
> least except for the one member that resigned.
> 
>>>> An accusation of embezzlement sounds serious.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> If as she herself alleged, Mrs Janet Greco used the FFmpeg booth for her
>>> or her employer's commercial interest, then that is embezzlement by the
>>> dictionary definition: the IBC booth funding that Thilo secured from the
>>> anonymous sponsor for FFmpeg would instead have been used by those third
>>> parties.
> 
>> It was not "instead used by those parties". They shared space at the booth,
>> a relatively common practice at NAB.
> 
> You are splitting hairs. They were using a booth designated FFmpeg and paid 
> for as sponsorship to a non-profit for their own commercial interest. This is 
> legally and fiscally sketchy. And presumably the "relatively common practice at 
> NAB" is for multiple companies to share booths, or for the company to pay for 
> a booth and host a non-profit, not the other way around.
> 
> 

GPAC is a popular open source media project, and the banner at the booth was for GPAC. To me it was very much two open source media projects sharing a booth rather than some random commercial company.

Motion Spell is to GPAC roughly what FFLabs is to FFmpeg, only with a lot less drama around it, and some additional tools in the toolbox like providing a commercial license.

While I found it surprising to share a booth with them, since "their own commercial interest" is to get companies to fund their open source project, much like we're all trying to get funding for FFmpeg, it didn't seem particularly problematic.

That said I'm all for not doing this again in the future, but again it's orthogonal to the costs for an FFmpeg booth at either NAB or IBC. 

- Cosmin