Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> my understand was that nvenc was just calling the actual driver with a few > trampoline functions. The kernel module is compilable, but the actual driver > is not open source, and installed with the machine, but is called from the > kernel module. Both are system libraries. The Nvidia Driver

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 23:42, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > 2019-02-08 22:51 GMT+01:00, Jean-Baptiste Kempf : > > > The Decklink part is similar > > I don't think it is similar: How can a driver for a very optional hardware > that nearly no user possesses and for which you have to download a > driver

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

2019-02-08 22:51 GMT+01:00, Jean-Baptiste Kempf : > The Decklink part is similar I don't think it is similar: How can a driver for a very optional hardware that nearly no user possesses and for which you have to download a driver via a complicated procedure be called a system library? Carl Eugen

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 22:27, Elliott Balsley wrote: > > But this is a different case than nvenc. > > How is it different? Nvenc links against libraries in the proprietary > Nvidia driver, for which source is not available. This is fine since > Nvidia library is considered to be a system librar

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> But this is a different case than nvenc. How is it different? Nvenc links against libraries in the proprietary Nvidia driver, for which source is not available. This is fine since Nvidia library is considered to be a system library under GPL. So why is Blackmagic not considered a system libr

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 22:11, Elliott Balsley wrote: > > > The source of the driver is in the Linux SDK package, but not of the > > controlling library. > > (This is the opposite of the nVidia drivers, from my understanding) > > Could you explain what you mean by that? I think the source for bot

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> The source of the driver is in the Linux SDK package, but not of the > controlling library. > (This is the opposite of the nVidia drivers, from my understanding) Could you explain what you mean by that? I think the source for both Blackmagic and Nvidia libraries are proprietary. _

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 18:31, Elliott Balsley wrote: > > > On Feb 8, 2019, at 01:17, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > > > Decklink SDK has a very weird EULA + headers license that makes it very > > dubious that it is free. > > Decklink refuses to clarify for now. That warrants a non-free flag. >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> On Feb 8, 2019, at 01:17, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > Decklink SDK has a very weird EULA + headers license that makes it very > dubious that it is free. > Decklink refuses to clarify for now. That warrants a non-free flag. > I know it's very weird, since the SDK has the source code of some

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

Hello, On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 09:01, Elliott Balsley wrote: > > On Jan 30, 2019, at 12:53, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > Imo, it is different in (nearly) every regard but as said, I don't see > > how this discussion can be fruitful in any way. > > > If anyone else has an opinion, I would love to l

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> On Jan 30, 2019, at 12:53, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > Imo, it is different in (nearly) every regard but as said, I don't see > how this discussion can be fruitful in any way. > If anyone else has an opinion, I would love to learn why Nvidia driver is considered a system library under GPL wh

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

2019-01-30 18:08 GMT+01:00, Elliott Balsley : > >> The BlackMagic Decklink drivers are not system libraries. > > Thank you for clarifying about the headers vs the library, I was > confused about that at first. The GPL definition of system library > is hard to understand, but I was mostly basing my

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> The BlackMagic Decklink drivers are not system libraries. Thank you for clarifying about the headers vs the library, I was confused about that at first. The GPL definition of system library is hard to understand, but I was mostly basing my opinion on this discussion of NVENC. It relies on t

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

2019-01-30 1:53 GMT+01:00, Elliott Balsley : > >> It is not Blackmagic who does not want you to distribute FFmpeg >> with their (proprietary) library, it is us who do not allow distribution >> of FFmpeg binaries that link against Blackmagic libraries. The wording here was not ideal: FFmpeg is by d

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

> It is not Blackmagic who does not want you to distribute FFmpeg > with their (proprietary) library, it is us who do not allow distribution > of FFmpeg binaries that link against Blackmagic libraries. When you say proprietary library, do you mean the Desktop Video driver? I believe this quali

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

2019-01-28 21:09 GMT+01:00, Elliott Balsley : > I see this old thread about Decklink licensing, and I disagree with the > nonfree requirement. Great! Do you speak for all FFmpeg developers or only for your commits? > I can’t figure out how to reply to the old thread, but here it is for > referen

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

In the first paragraph of the EULA, they define “the software” as the SDK and the accompanying documentation. The way I read it, they do not want you to distribute the complete SDK package, specifically the PDF documentation file. But the email I quoted below from Blackmagic explicitly states

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

On 28 Jan 2019, at 21:09, Elliott Balsley wrote: I see this old thread about Decklink licensing, and I disagree with the nonfree requirement. I can’t figure out how to reply to the old thread, but here it is for reference: https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/patch/3230/

[FFmpeg-devel] configure: Fix decklink license dependency

I see this old thread about Decklink licensing, and I disagree with the nonfree requirement. I can’t figure out how to reply to the old thread, but here it is for reference: https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/patch/3230/ Downloading the SDK from Blackmagic us