Re: dual licensing try 2

Hi,

> > As you refusers (Michael, Rich) don't develop demuxers anyway, it
> > shouldn't hurt you. It may hurt Albeu, but who cares? :) (sorry)
> 
> It's very simple. I am opposed to involvement in any project which
> will result in the increase of non-free software, and I have no

Why will it be non-free?
The whole code is under GPL, only they have the option to license
demuxer/stream code and modify it without releasing the changes.

> interest in being involved in a dual-licensed MPlayer.

Ok.

> Besides, it was already brought up that if non-free licenses are sold
> for only part of MPlayer, then lame proprietary software companies
> will just steal the rest of MPlayer too, and then the core developers

they will be sued then.

> won't pursue legal action against these companies because they're
> being paid by them. It's a clear conflict of interest.

wrong.
they will be sued by stopping (invalidate) their license
(think of what sco did with ibm)

the other option would be releasing demuxer+stream under BSD(-like)
license, but it wouldn't left any right to us.

now, companies interested in using demuxer/stream core for their
streaing, converion, etc applications can't use it, so they
don't support us developers implementing custom features, and they
don't implement features themself. instead they're using concurrent
projects and support them, so if i follow your thinking, the
other project will be imporved faster and people will use it and
contributions will go there, and mplayer g2 will die :)

> So: drop dual-license, or drop me. It's your choice.

sorry, but if i have to choose, i'll drop you.
(unless you finish VP layer asap, then i'll re-consider :)


A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team

--
Developer of MPlayer G2, the Movie Framework for all - http://www.MPlayerHQ.hu