On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Måns Rullgård <m...@mansr.com> wrote: > Luca Barbato <lu_z...@gentoo.org> writes: > >> On 07/19/2012 10:19 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 03:38:38PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote : >>>> The SFLC lawyer said the libfdk-aac license looked (l)gpl-incompatible >>>> to him. >>> >>> Well, I am sad, but not surprised. >>> >> >> I'd like to have a better understanding >> >> fdk: >> >> Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without >> modification, are permitted without >> payment of copyright license fees provided that you satisfy the >> following conditions: >> >> (A) >> You must retain the complete text of this software license in >> redistributions of the FDK AAC Codec or >> your modifications thereto in source code form. > > This is normal and similar to BSD clause 1. > >> (B) >> You must retain the complete text of this software license in the >> documentation and/or other materials >> provided with redistributions of the FDK AAC Codec or your modifications >> thereto in binary form. > > This is similar to BSD clause 2. > >> You must make available free of charge copies of the complete source >> code of the FDK AAC Codec and your modifications thereto to recipients >> of copies in binary form. > > This could be seen to be an additional restriction compared to (L)GPL 1: > > You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, [...]. > > It could also be argued that the "free of charge" requirement applies > only to the source code as such and not to the transfer thereof. > >> (C) >> The name of Fraunhofer may not be used to endorse or promote products >> derived from this library without >> prior written permission. > > This is the BSD non-endorsement clause with a few words removed. > >> (D) >> You may not charge copyright license fees for anyone to use, copy or >> distribute the FDK AAC Codec >> software or your modifications thereto. > > This is LGPL 2c in part. LGPL adds "under the terms of this License." > >> (E) >> Your modified versions of the FDK AAC Codec must carry prominent notices >> stating that you changed the software >> and the date of any change. > > This is LGPL 2b. > >> For modified versions of the FDK AAC Codec, the term "Fraunhofer FDK >> AAC Codec Library for Android" must be replaced by the term >> "Third-Party Modified Version of the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library >> for Android." > > This restriction is probably not compatible with (L)GPL. Naming > restrictions are cited as rendering the Apache-1.1 and PHP licences > GPL-incompatible. > >> Currently the mismatch is (E) more than (D) in my eyes. >> >> D is a match for lgpl-2.1 2. c >> >> c) You must cause the whole of the work to be licensed at no >> charge to all third parties under the terms of this License. > > Agreed. > >> The second part of E is a stronger version of the non-endorsement clause >> from bsd (that is compatible) so I'm not sure it could be considered an >> additional restriction. > > I'm afraid the FSF is stricter in its interpretation than you are. > >> Could we have a specific detail on which section clashes? > > +1
"You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only for purposes that are authorized by appropriate patent licenses." I think this part is GPL incompatible because it is an additional restriction (or is it not considered part of the licence?). _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list libav-devel@libav.org https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
