[FFmpeg-devel] Files crashing FFmpeg

Jason Garrett-Glaser darkshikari
Wed Dec 3 18:58:17 CET 2008

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 9:09 AM, compn <tempn at twmi.rr.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 14:30:09 +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 04:44:45AM -0800, Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 4:01 AM, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 11:39:01PM -0800, Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
>>> >> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:09 AM, compn <tempn at twmi.rr.com> wrote:
>>> >> > On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 21:54:29 -0800, Mike Melanson wrote:
>>> >> >>Benjamin Larsson wrote:
>>> >> >>> This list http://tranquillity.ath.cx/ffmpeg_crashfiles.txt contains
>>> >> >>> links to files that crashes a FFmpeg version from 2007. Can anyone come
>>> >> >>> up with a good tool so we can run through and check all these files ?
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> This list was donated by Picsearch.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>Do we have the project budget to send them a nice fruit basket for the
>>> >> >>holidays? This is some good stuff. It would be nice if some other
>>> >> >>organizations that automatically process millions of diverse files with
>>> >> >>FFmpeg could throw some problem files our way.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > it would be nice of youtube to send some changes back our way too...
>>> >>
>>> >> From a talk I had with the Google engineer who runs the Youtube
>>> >> encoding chain a few days ago, it seems Google's official policy is
>>> >> that they're not allowed to publicly admit that they use open source
>>> >> products such as ffmpeg (!!).
>>> >
>>> > What is the reason he gave for this nonsensical attitude?  Google uses
>>> > open source all over in other places and employs a multitude of central
>>> > open source devs...
>>> There were a number of excuses he tried to make for this.  (all quotes
>>> aren't actual quotes)
>>> The primary one was that of patents, with regards to x264: "we
>>> shouldn't publicly state we are using x264 because then people might
>>> go after you for patent reasons."  There is some glimpse of reason to
>>> this, as x264 is a rather small project that hasn't gotten takedown
>>> threats just yet.
>>The only case where this ever happened was libdts.  But the entity to go
>>after x264 would be the MPEG-LA.  They have not shown this kind of
>>behavior in the past 10 years or so, I do not expect they will in the
> i wonder what happened to libvp62 ....
>>Also note that none of the attempts to take down open source projects
>>like this have ever been successful.
>>> But then I asked him "well than what about ffmpeg?  Do you seriously
>>> expect that companies would be more likely to go after ffmpeg for
>>> patent infringement because Google uses them?"
>>> And he responded that "competitors to Google [e.g. Microsoft] might
>>> choose to go after ffmpeg to try to 'get at google'".
>>Complete nonsense of course.  Microsoft could also try to go after Linux
>>to 'get at Google'.  Or after a ton of other projects where Google has
>>not problem admitting they use them...
>>> Yes, the reasoning is complete horseshit, but apparently they're hard
>>> and fast on not making any public statement on using open source
>>> software.  This is of course hilarious irony given Summer of Code and
>>> other such programs Google runs.  By the way, the conversation began
>>> when I asked him about the possibility of giving some credit to ffmpeg
>>> and x264 (perhaps in some About section somewhere on the Youtube
>>> site).
>>Well, we can turn the tables around and expose that they do use FFmpeg
>>and x264, together with some proof if need be.  That should settle these
>>silly matters of secrecy.
> maybe someone could visit a google headquarters and talk to a human.

The person who I had a conversation with (the one I mentioned above)
was Pascal aka skal, who I talked to for almost two whole days at
Google HQ ;)

You might know him as the guy who wrote the skal_fdct and most of
Xvid's assembly.

Dark Shikari

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list