On Monday 03 February 2003 01:16 pm, Truls Johnsen wrote: > On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, XulChris wrote: > > On Monday 03 February 2003 02:43 am, Truls Johnsen wrote: > > > If I remember correctly, mpeg1/2 requires a license from the patent > > > holders. There is supposedly possible to get a free license for non > > > commercial use, and there exists some mpeg decoders released under GPL. > > > Of course, these can't be used unless the mame licensse is changed to > > > GPL. > > > > hmm im confused, doesnt mame use zlib which is also GPL? How is using a > > GPL mpeg decoder different than using a GPL compression library? or is > > zlib BSD or something? I still do not understand where there are any > > license violations going on... > > zlib is not GPL, it uses its own license that basically say you can use > the code for whatever you like, unless you claim you wrote it, and that if > you make a derivative work, this must be clearly marked as such > (http://www.gzip.org/zlib/zlib_license.html) > > This means you can use it in (L)GPL, other opensource programs, or closed > source commersial programs.
ok but still, what about stuff like glibc? xmame makes extensive use of glibc calls and there is no license violation. Isn't glibc LGPL? and arent there mpeg decoder libraries that are also LGPL? _______________________________________________ Xmame mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
