And by the way: Following your link to the takedown notice does lead to a website about illegal downloads of TV-Series that are done using rtmpdump. What we do is not a tool to download random rtmp streams that could be used for downloading TV-Series. So I don't see how you can build a claim based on the article and takedown notice that would affect us or anyody else that read or writes RTMP packets. [I am still no lawyer though :)]
Sebastian 2012/7/22 [email protected] <[email protected]> > Your article is from 2009, I think in the meantime things have changed. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-120 also is discussing RTMP > license issues (although more discussing the specs AS-IS). > > However, writing the stream to discuss has nothing to do with the an RTMP > specification document in fact. > What you do is simple take the packets that you receive and write them to > disc. > I personally have never read the RTMP specs anyway, but I was able to grab > the stream and write packets to disc. > > The issue about the RTMP spec from my point of view is more likely the > following: > The RTMP spec contained (or does still contain) portions that say: If you > read this spec you agree on NOT doing this or that. > That is why some linux developers working on Flash player clones always > claim to "never read that spec" but rather understood it by just looking at > the raw bytestream. > Or for example the motivation of websites like that one: > http://osflash.org/documentation/rtmp is to have a public, by reverse > engineering produced specification that does NOT rely on reading Adobe docs. > > I am not a lawyer, but from my point of any specs really can't prevent > that any user on any device that somehow "randomly" reads packets on his > eth0 device or by using tools like Wireshark reads those packets and > analysis what parts they consist of. > What those RTMP specs say (and is seen criticial is) the part where Adobe > claims: By *reading *the specs you agree on certain terms. > However even the reading might be not so critical anymore since Adobe has > applied some major changes on their position again Open Source. > > Sebastian > > > 2012/7/22 Alexei Fedotov <[email protected]> > >> As for recordings, AFAIU, server side recording would have legal >> problems, see [1]. I'm not a lawyer to say that for sure. >> >> [1] >> http://linuxcentre.net/adobe-has-issued-a-dmca-removal-request-for-rtmpdump >> >> -- >> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, >> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, >> http://dataved.ru/ >> +7 916 562 8095 >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Alexei Fedotov <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Hello George, >>> >>> 1. I didn't record things, I've tested standard 1:1 videoconference >>> setup. >>> 2. I had maximum resolution of 1024x768. It seems the bandwidth is >>> limited by 1,2 MBit/sec, probably by flash player. I got even lower frame >>> rate, and bandwidth didn't grow. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, >>> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, >>> http://dataved.ru/ >>> +7 916 562 8095 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 6:00 AM, George Kirkham >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Alexei,**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> What difference does it make if you are recording at 1920x1080 (the >>>> current HD standard).**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> I can see an advantage with server side recording as long as it does >>>> not burden the server so that it cannot support the users. The ability to >>>> record is not that important to me as to get "the ability for users to have >>>> a meeting" working smoothly. The issue of managing different screen >>>> resolutions is a challenge to me.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Thanks,**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> George Kirkham**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> *From:* Alexei Fedotov [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> *Sent:* Sunday, 22 July 2012 1:33 AM >>>> >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: Video quality on high resolution**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Hello folks,**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> I've made some research on the peak bandwidth usage by opening two >>>> browser windows.**** >>>> >>>> 640*480 1,2 MBit/s (the rate is still below 30 frames per second, >>>> setting <bandwidthNeededNormal>0</bandwidthNeededNormal> improved things a >>>> bit)**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> 432*240 0,8 MBit/s**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> 120*90 0,2 MBit/s**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Just want to share the method. I've opened two browser windows (that >>>> gives us four streams) and measured traffi via performance manager.**** >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, >>>> Alexei Fedotov / Алексей Федотов, >>>> http://dataved.ru/ >>>> +7 916 562 8095 >>>> >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Sergey Kobzar < >>>> [email protected]> wrote:**** >>>> >>>> It seems this fixed the issue. >>>> I will check and confirm tomorrow. >>>> >>>> Thank you for this option, Stephen.**** >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/25/12 17:11, Stephen Cottham wrote:**** >>>> >>>> If you're running on a LAN and BW is not an issue have you tried >>>> setting this >>>> >>>> <bandwidthNeededBest>0</bandwidthNeededBest> >>>> >>>> In ..... /red5/webapps/openmeetings/config.xml ? >>>> >>>> Worked well for us. >>>> >>>> Best Regards >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Stephen Cottham >>>> Group IT Manager (Associate) >>>> >>>> Robert Bird Group >>>> Level 5, 333 Ann St >>>> Brisbane, Queensland, 4000, Australia >>>> Phone: +6173 319 2777 (AUS) >>>> Phone: +44207 592 8000 (UK) >>>> Fax: +6173 319 2799 >>>> >>>> Mobile: +61400 756 963 (AUS) >>>> Mobile: +447900 918 616 (UK) >>>> Web: www.robertbird.com >>>> >>>> >>>> This email and any attachments are confidential and may contain legally >>>> privileged information or copyright material. Unless expressly stated, >>>> confidentiality and/or legal privilege is not intended to be waived by the >>>> sending of this email. The contents of this email, including any >>>> attachments, are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to >>>> whom they are addressed. If you are not an intended recipient, please >>>> contact us immediately by return email and then delete both messages. You >>>> may not otherwise read, forward, copy, use or disclose this email or any >>>> attachments. Any views expressed in this email are those of the individual >>>> sender except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states >>>> otherwise. It is your responsibility to check any attachments for viruses >>>> or defects before opening or sending them on. None of the sender or its >>>> related entities accepts any liability for any consequential damage >>>> resulting from this email containing computer viruses. >>>> >>>> Disclaimer added by CodeTwo Exchange Rules >>>> http://www.codetwo.com >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Sergey Kobzar [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, 25 April 2012 3:07 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Video quality on high resolution >>>> >>>> I just uninstalled previously installed codecs and left VP8. I see >>>> improvements but quality is still not ideal... >>>> >>>> I;d want to know what I can do else + other options. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/25/12 16:46, Alexei Fedotov wrote:**** >>>> >>>> Sounds fantastic... That should require major code changes to switch >>>> codecs on. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> With best regards / с наилучшими пожеланиями, Alexei Fedotov / Алексей >>>> Федотов, http://dataved.ru/ >>>> +7 916 562 8095 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Sergey Kobzar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote:**** >>>> >>>> Thank you for reply. >>>> >>>> I have installed VP8 codecs and they improved quality a little. But >>>> it is still not ideal/expected. >>>> >>>> I assume, at the moment I have no other solutions, right? Can >>>> SWF10/11 improve situation? When are you going switch to it? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/24/12 13:53, Maxim Solodovnik wrote:**** >>>> >>>> >>>> There is no way to specify other codec for OM. >>>> please search dev mailing list, there will be no other codecs until >>>> we switch to SWF10/11 >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 17:49, Sergey >>>> Kobzar<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> >>>> Do I need remove previously installed codecs or how can I tell >>>> OpenMeetings to use codec below? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/24/12 11:46, Alexei Fedotov wrote: >>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/__VP8 >>>> >>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VP8> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Sergey Kobzar >>>> >>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Alexei >>>> >>>> Could you give me links to Goole codecs or your flash >>>> please? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/24/12 09:50, Alexei Fedotov wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> That's known flash issue. As for now we don't have a >>>> workarond. Some >>>> possible options include upgrading flash (in our build) >>>> or migrating to >>>> google codecs >>>> >>>> 23.04.2012 22:05 пользователь "Sergey >>>> Kobzar"<sergey.kobzar@itcraft.__org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> <mailto:sergey.kobzar@itcraft.__org >>>> >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>> написал: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> WBR >>>> Maxim aka solomax**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Sebastian Wagner > https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock > http://www.openmeetings.de > http://www.webbase-design.de > http://www.wagner-sebastian.com > [email protected] > -- Sebastian Wagner https://twitter.com/#!/dead_lock http://www.openmeetings.de http://www.webbase-design.de http://www.wagner-sebastian.com [email protected]
