[FFmpeg-user] More Liberal Licensing

Suminda Sirinath Salpitikorala Dharmasena sirinath1978m at gmail.com
Tue Nov 28 08:28:04 EET 2023

There are projects which have switched. Many of the authors can be
identified by the commits. If they were employed and made the contribution
as part of their work, contacting the employee might be the best option.
Also namy contributors may be connected you can get the help of colleagues
to contact them.


   - You have to use the library as it is if you don't want to license the
   code as *GPL
      - Changing the API slightly might require the whole code to GPLed
      - You cannot just borrow some code than using the library
   - There are whitelisting issues for *GPL too


   - Nearly impossible to use in a commercial project

This is a crucial library that the whole world depends on and not a
commetilised product by one company. Hence it will be good if it can be
made copy free (https://copyfree.org).


On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 23:33, Carl Zwanzig <cpz at tuunq.com> wrote:

> On 11/27/2023 9:50 AM, Suminda Sirinath Salpitikorala Dharmasena wrote:
> > Is there a possibility to gradually move away from *GPL to a more liberal
> > license? E.g. Apache 2.0 and/or MIT and/or BSD.
> That's unlikely as overall ffmpeg has contributions from many authors and
> they'd all have to agree (also note the "non-free" compile option).
> While I'm not a big fan of the GPL, what restrictions does it impose that
> are objectionable?
> z!
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-user mailing list
> ffmpeg-user at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-user-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".

More information about the ffmpeg-user mailing list