On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 07:55:50 +0200 Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-04-15 2:35 GMT+02:00 wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com>: > > > Legally, all these copyright headers are meaningless, as long as the > > license is correct. > > You are joking, right? Well, are you joking? While it may seem so, you apparently aren't. > > If they weren't, FFmpeg would be in trouble for changing the copyright > > headers of all files added by Libav from "Libav" to "FFmpeg". > > Nobody is talking about the project name. OK? > > It's possible that Libav is not always careful with attribution, but > > it's the same with FFmpeg. For example, af_pan.c is LGPL, even though > > it was ported from MPlayer GPL code, and the author could not be > > contacted. Recently, I contacted the same author about relicensing the > > same MPlayer code (of which af_pan.c was a subset of) to LGPL, and he > > explicitly denied relicensing. So if I had been cehoyos, I probably > > wouldn't shut up about how FFmpeg violates copyrights (fortunately I'm > > not cehoyos). I think nowadays af_pan.c certainly does not violate the > > original author's copyright though, because absolutely all code was > > removed/replaced. > > Do I understand correctly that you are neither defaming Clement nor > doing something that is illegal? Is that some sort of trick question? I'm doing neither. But what _you_ do is defaming the entire Libav project (and possibly me), which is illegal and against the FFmpeg CoC. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
