[FFmpeg-trac] #7589(undetermined:new): NewTek distributing non-free FFmpeg build

[FFmpeg]

#7589: NewTek distributing non-free FFmpeg build
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
             Reporter:  Zeranoe      |                    Owner:
                 Type:  license      |                   Status:  new
  violation                          |                Component:
             Priority:  important    |  undetermined
              Version:  unspecified  |               Resolution:
             Keywords:  NewTek       |               Blocked By:
             Blocking:               |  Reproduced by developer:  0
Analyzed by developer:  0            |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by JEEB):

 I think more than just the "distributing a binary with enable-nonfree
 configured" part, people are seeing this as an example of where a company
 takes advantage of open source components such as libx264 or FFmpeg, while
 not keeping it all kosher. It may not have been your intent, but that's
 how it comes out when a company producing a blob that is only usable with
 enable-nonfree decides to publish a binary that contains useful utilities
 covered by libraries linked into it - which are not supposed to be
 license-compatible with each other.

 To put it more specifically, your SDK is not compatible with GPL, yet
 clearly someone felt like having fabulous H.264 encoding through libx264
 was something that would "sell" (not necessarily regarding money, that is)
 your solution even better. Otherwise enable-gpl and enable-libx264 would
 have not been set. Or the clearly manually added x264-related define. And
 I don't disagree. Having x264 in a binary with your input reading makes it
 much more feasible for various usage.

 Now - unfortunately - your own license and x264 do not match up with this.
 Your license and GPL are not compatible with each other. You are not an OS
 library/feature, and you're not something that at least apparently would
 also be source distributable under the GPL (since GPL is viral, after
 all).

 Of course, now, the fun little thing after you have published a binary
 like this, is that I think technically anyone who received this binary can
 request the full code under the GPL - including your NDI library. Of
 course IANAL, but ┐(´д｀)┌.

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/7589#comment:14>
FFmpeg <https://ffmpeg.org>
FFmpeg issue tracker