On Sun, 10 Mar 2019, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
On Sat, 9 Mar 2019, at 21:58, Marton Balint wrote:
On Sat, 9 Mar 2019, Dennis Mungai wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Mar 2019 at 23:19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2019-03-09 21:16 GMT+01:00, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com>:
>> > 2019-03-09 21:12 GMT+01:00, Kieran Kunhya <kier...@obe.tv>:
>> >> They have not responded to any communications:
>> >> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/7589
>> >
>> > Missing minor version bump
>>
>> Sorry about this, I used the wrong patch reading tool...
>>
>> > and please also post a news entry.
>>
>> Please do, Carl Eugen
>>
>>
> Thanks for this.
> It's long overdue (3 months is more than enough time to respond and act on
> a license violation).
Huh? Newtek removed the nonfree ffmpeg from their site, that was their
response. So the company is no longer violating the license.
Removal of past violations does not magically erase the past infrigement.
Legally, OK. But as far as I know we typically ask license violators to
either release the source code, or stop distribuiting the violating code.
And a company that does either usually goes into the good-guys bucket. Not
here. So removing NDI to punish a them for past violations does not seem
fair to me.
It was also unfortunate to give them ultimatums. If you look at the trac
ticket, we look like the bully, and not newtek. A reasonable request would
have been to ask them for protocol specs. Maybe can you do that? You are
a president of a quite famous organization after all, maybe they will
consider it.
Thanks,
Marton
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
