[XviD-devel] it doubts...

[Michael Militzer]

Hi,


> This entire situation is only complicated by the fact that XviD is
> patent encumbered code and the GPL clearly does not apply to such.

This is not really correct. Section 8 of the GPL makes it possible to
release patent covered code under the GPL...

Michael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xvid-devel-admin@xvid.org [mailto:xvid-devel-admin@xvid.org] On
> Behalf Of Vincent GOMEZ
> Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 6:49 AM
> To: xvid-devel@xvid.org
> Subject: RE: [XviD-devel] it doubts...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > A: A commerical application can be written to execute a specific
> >    GPL'd application.
> >
> > B: A commerical video encoding application can be written to utilize
> >    a specific GPL'd video codec.
> >
> >
> > Could somebody point out to me the difference between case A and B?
> >
>
> It's a known problem of GPL. There's another corner case that GPL 3.0 is
> supposed to fix :
>
>  - Create a derivative work from GPL code
>  - Put it on a server
>  - Add a web services layer that calls the executable and returns
> executable result.
>
> Then you don't need to distribute your modifications because you're not
> distributing your binary but just the services.
>
> Your A and B problem is simular to this one as offering service can be
> considered as a link against GPL code. But GPL has been written before
> anyone on earth has ever thought about such complicated systems to get
> things done in a computer. GPL 3.0 should be the answer to all these
> cases.
>
> --
> Edouard Gomez
>
> _______________________________________________
> XviD-devel mailing list
> XviD-devel@xvid.org
> http://list.xvid.org/mailman/listinfo/xvid-devel
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> XviD-devel mailing list
> XviD-devel@xvid.org
> http://list.xvid.org/mailman/listinfo/xvid-devel
>