Hi Larry, 3.2b and 4 at https://www.red.com/legal/red-r3d-sdk-license-agreement <https://www.red.com/legal/red-r3d-sdk-license-agreement> feel fairly restrictive. Even if you don’t ship the SDK you’re still giving away header information which I also interpret as making the contents of the API openly available (see 1.5 as the definition of header files) and also violates the confidential information.
I agree - it likely hasn’t been updated since being freely available, my apologies for digressing the thread. Colin > On Jul 22, 2019, at 9:31 PM, Larry Gritz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Colin, I'm looking at the R3D SDK license agreement right now, and I see no > such thing. It says that you can't use their trademarks to market your > products or imply that they endorse it, but that's totally ordinary and in > fact is also stipulated by the BSD open source license. It wouldn't prevent a > bland factual statement that you support the format. > > The license is not all that awful, it's just ambiguous. The problem, as I see > it, is that it says it covers "[using] the Software for the sole purpose of > internally developing Developer Programs," and also that "'Developer > Programs' means compiled code generated using the Software, or any part > thereof, designed to function with RED Products." I'm just not sure what that > means or how to interpret this in an open source context where we are only > distributing source code, and none of it is their source code. > > I suspect that the license itself dates from before the SDK was freely > downloadable on the web. It's got language that is more appropriate to > confidential information. Maybe the SDK itself used to be available only > under NDA? And after they made it so that anybody can download and inspect > it, they never updated the license? > > Remember that the idea is that OIIO would not redistribute any part of the > SDK at all, not one byte. That's quite different than shipping a binary > product that would necessarily have parts of the SDK embedded in it. Is it > "using" the software to have program source code text that makes calls to the > R3D API? Or is it "using" the software only if you are the studio who builds > OIIO in the presence of the installed R3D libraries or that runs the software > that makes the calls (i.e., actually USING the software that Red makes)? > > This should be a conceptually simple thing to clear up if I can find a human > to talk to. I just need a clear yes or no to "is it ok for an open source > program to make calls to their SDK, if no part of the SDK itself is > distributed?" > > Like I said, if anybody knows someone at Red, please put me in touch. > > -- lg > > >> On Jul 22, 2019, at 8:50 PM, Colin Doncaster <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I realize that OIIO isn’t a part of the ASWF but I wonder if leveraging >> connections amongst members might come in handy? >> >> Based on the license agreement, the way it reads is that even if OIIO did >> support R3d files you’d wouldn’t be able to talk about it - it’s pretty much >> fight club. >> >> >>> On Jul 22, 2019, at 8:36 PM, Larry Gritz <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Coincidentally, I was just looking into this a couple weeks ago. >>> >>> You can download their SDK for free, and while you obviously can't >>> redistribute it, ordinarily there would be no particular reason why you >>> couldn't link against it if you built the software yourself (i.e., an >>> optional dependency that would enable r3d support if the r3d SDK was found >>> on the system and presumably properly licensed by the studio at the time >>> that they built their in-house copy of OIIO). >>> >>> But, reading their license, I found it ambiguously worded to the point of >>> being incomprehensible. It was just not clear if they disallowed only >>> distribution of their code (which would be expected) or if they were trying >>> to disallow even *calling* its API (which would be very unusual). It seemed >>> clear that it was OK to call it for in-house software, but the wording was >>> such that it didn't spell out the rules for open source software. It's not >>> a matter of trade secrets; like I said, anybody can download their SDK and >>> headers from their site. >>> >>> I wrote them a letter explaining the situation and asking for >>> clarification, but never got a reply at all. >>> >>> If anybody knows somebody there who could be put in touch with me, please >>> let me know. I would think that in a reasonable world, they would recognize >>> that OIIO support could only help their customers and would be of no >>> particular help to their competitors. So I can't even fathom what the >>> objection would be. But I won't do it if I can't get a clear word from them >>> that it's not violating their license. >>> >>> -- lg >>> >>> >>>> On Jul 22, 2019, at 6:19 PM, Colin Doncaster <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> If I recall R3D requires a specific license from Red to use and there >>>> might be sticky specifics about integrating into open source libraries, >>>> this could be the reason why libraw may have discontinued updates? >>>> >>>>> On Jul 22, 2019, at 6:07 PM, Alex Hughes <[email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey I was wondering if OIIO supports reading r3d files. >>>>> >>>>> I was looking through the release notes for libraw and that states that >>>>> it could read r3d files. >>>>> https://www.libraw.org/node/1299 <https://www.libraw.org/node/1299> >>>>> >>>>> However, that was in 2011 and I would imagine things could have changed >>>>> since then. >>>>> >>>>> My oiiotool seems to seg fault when I try to read r3d files and I was >>>>> wondering if ti was even supposed to support r3d or if my build was just >>>>> broken in some way. >>>>> >>>>> I know Red likes to sell their SDK, but I was sort of hoping that LibRaw >>>>> had an implementation that we could rely on. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Alex >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>>> <http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>>> <http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org> >>> >>> -- >>> Larry Gritz >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Oiio-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org >>> <http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Oiio-dev mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org > > -- > Larry Gritz > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Oiio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
_______________________________________________ Oiio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openimageio.org/listinfo.cgi/oiio-dev-openimageio.org
