Re: [xine-devel] xine-plugin

[James <ja...@pi...>]

On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 08:42:49PM +0100, James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
| 
| So, if xine automatically downloads a windows codec, is it breaking the 
| windows codec license, or xine's GPL license?

Xine's GPL. If xine were LGPL, there'd be no problem. This is why
people sometimes call the GPL "viral" - once one part of your code is
"infected" with it, the rest must be too.
 
| I really don't see the benefit of putting a license on free code which 
| means that it can never be mixed with commercial software.

The benefit is that it stops commercial people from ripping off GPL
code and using it in their software without giving credit or source.

Imagine MS decided maintaining IIS was too hard, and also imagine
Apache wasn't GPL. They could rip Apache off, rename it to "IIS 6" and
sell it precompiled and not have to give out source.

That's what the GPL protects you from (I suspect other licences do
too...)

If Xine wasn't under some sort of "open" licence, anyone could take all
the code and call it their own. They could make DVD navigation work
totally, but never give a single line of code to the dvdnav people.
I suspect, given the amount of effort gone into it, that'd make the
developers a little upset.

| Surely we are improving the commercial software (codecs) by allowing 
| them to be run on a larger variety of operating systems?

Commercial software isn't ours to improve...
 
| Can anyone help me understand all this?

Did that help?

-- 
I will not get very far with this attitude  
 
6AD6 865A BF6E 76BB 1FC2 | www.piku.org.uk/public-key.asc
E4C4 DEEA 7D08 D511 E149 | www.piku.org.uk wn...@cv...t.hx (rot13'd)