Stephen:

>     minor minor nit: it's Songbird, not SongBird.  (sorry, gotta make 
> sure we correct those trademarks, ya know? ;-))

Sorry, thanks for the correction.

> I just want to clarify here.  Are you talking about the Fluendo 
> GStreamer MP3 plugin:
> http://www.fluendo.com/resources/fluendo_mp3.php
> ?

Yes, that's correct.

> If Songbird is distributed as GPL, and it uses GStreamer under LGPL (and 
> thus converts GStreamer to GPL via section 3 of the LGPL), why would 
> that stop you from using the Fluendo one (which is distributed via MIT)?

The LGPL is a more lenient license, and does not have the issues that
GPL has.  Therefore there is no issue linking the MP3 plugin into LGPL
GStreamer.

However, it is a problem to link LGPL GStreamer with a plugin that
contains patent restrictions (such as the requirement of paying a fee)
into a GPL end-user application, such as rhythmbox or Songbird.

Just because the Fluendo code is released under the MIT license does
not mean that the licensing restrictions (you must pay a fee) do not
apply to the Fluendo MP3 code.  You could think of this code as being
dual-licensed - under both the MIT license and the license associated
with MPEG.  Another way to look at it is the plugin code that does
not involve the MPEG patents is under the MIT license.

> Or is the GStreamer MP3 decoder plugin you're using the binary Sorenson 
> one referenced in the gstreamer.freedesktop.org FAQ you linked below?  
> Our current release (0.5) is licensed under GPL, due to our dependency 
> on VLC for Mac/Windows.  For 0.6 we can move to something like MPL since 
> we'll be moving to GStreamer on all three platforms.

If Songbird is GPL, then it would have the same issue.  You would not
be able to distribute Songbird which uses GStreamer and a MP3 decoder
at the same time.

I am not familiar with the MPL, but if it allows you to link in such
code that has licensing restrictions, then the MPL might be okay.

> I'm actually refining our licensing stuff now, so it's possible I can 
> look into adding an exemption like what Totem has - but I just want to 
> make sure I fully understand all the issues first.  :)  Knowing exactly 
> which MP3 decoder plugin you're talking about would help me I think..

Providing an exception like Totem has would be a good thing, just to
be clear.  Providing such an exception with the GPL license is also
a way to resolve the issue.  However, the totem exception only allows
GStreamer plugins that have such licensing restrictions.  You might
want a more general exception that allows any backend plugins - in
case you might want to support other backends aside from GStreamer
in the future.

Brian

Reply via email to