[FFmpeg-devel] use of UINT64_C in libavutil/common.h

Måns Rullgård mans
Fri May 7 13:04:19 CEST 2010

VALETTE Eric RD-MAPS-REN <eric2.valette at orange-ftgroup.com> writes:

> On 05/07/2010 10:35 AM, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>>> 3) I will not point the finger at the involved company here but will
>>> address the issue internally (takes several months to resolve in
>>> general)
>> Just give us the name so we can sue them ourselves.
> Ask yourself: what are you really more interested in: suing or making
> the supplier company provide access to used fmmpeg code for that
> particular product (provided they indeed use ffmpeg)?  I think I have
> more chance to succeed than you have and more rapidly although there
> is no guaranty as there is a third party involved .

Only we, the copyright holders, can sue for violation of our rights.
You suggested that whatever action Orange is able to take will be
months in the making.  We can have our lawyers send them a letter next
week if we deem it necessary.

While we doubt they'll have made any useful improvements to the FFmpeg
code, we do want them to obey the law.  In that sense, yes, we are
possibly more interested in showing them who's boss than in getting
the code from them.

> But if you prefer I can hapilly do nothing. Anyway orange may, in the
> end, countersue the real culprit if money lost or business opportunity
> lost is foreseen.

Orange can only sue for breach of contract between itself and the
supplier.  This is independent of any legal action taken on our part
against said supplier on copyright violation grounds.

I wonder if it is possible to force (subpoena) Orange to disclose the
name of the supplier in a case like this.

M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list