[MPlayer-dev-eng] MPlayer licensing [and lotso other stuff as I'm typingSat Nov 24 12:52:16 2001

[Daniel A. Nagy]

Hi.

> > If what scares you about GPL is the "stealing" code, BSD allows to take the
> > code, modify it, and sale the modifications in closed_source format, as the
> > guys from russia are doing, even without mentioning a shit about you.
> > 
> > I _REALLY_ would like to know what you, Arpi, have against GPL, since it
> > has allowed you to use great peaces of code for making such a great program
> > that mplayer is. With those projects in GPL you have been able to borrow the
> > code and modify it, improve it.
> 
> Imho Arpi is not against GPL his problem is about the fact that users
> using GPL softwares may even be in big trouble because of SOME points of
> GPL. Afaik the source of his opinion was the fact that he couldn't compile
> a non-GPL driver into the GPLed Linux kernel so he couldn't use at it all
> (since it was some boot device or so, ask him :). Of course he would have
> used initrd. But there is some truth about the fact that GPL has got SOME
> disadvantages as well. But imho there's NO license which can avoid stealing
> code, guarantee freedom without ANY possible negative effect. That's simply
> impossible since a single software (like Linux kernel) must consist of
> pieces licensed with the same rules as its components ... So in our
> non-perfect world I must treat GPL as the BEST available option ...

Aren't the guys who release drivers with GPL incompatible licenses to blame
in the first place?

Secondly, let me point out that GPL is essentially a hack on the American
copyright legislation, and even in the States, it has never been upheld in court.

Software licenses are NOT law. If you break a software license, you are not
necessarily breaking the law. IMHO, it is very important to behave in an
ethical way and defend yourself against unethical behavior on others' part.
But always clinging to the letter of licenses is just simpleminded;
Copyright holders do not have absolute power over the subject of the
copyright: most countries' legislation has provisions to protect consumer
rights (US DMCA is a notable exception).

The copyright law is radically different in most countries and it is always
a wise decision to get informed about your country's legislation and that of
other countries', if they are involved. In the overwhelming majority of
countries, law has precedence over licenses. For example, the Russian law
explicitly allows decompilation (disassembly) for interoperability purposes,
so it doesn't matter that M$ EULA prohibits it: it's still perfectly legal
in Russia. Similary, in most countries (again US is an exception) you are
almost certainly allowed to compile that driver into the kernel, if you
still credit the author and point out the incompatibility in the license.
Yes, you are breaking the driver's license :-)))) or even the GPL, but you are almost
certainly not breaking any law. Furthermore, it is advisable to contact the
drivers' author and ask him to: either modify the license so that it
complies, or provide an explicit exemption for your particular project.
Remember the Trolltech story?

-- 
Dan