ASF spec licensing issues

[Hetz Ben Hamo]

Well,

Instead of starting to fiddle with those spec files - why won't you take 
something which is:

1. ready (more or less) to be used
2. Support big amounts of codecs, decode and encode:

Codecs:
  Encoders: ac3 mp2 mpeg1video h263 h263p rv10 mjpeg mpeg4 msmpeg4v1 msmpeg4v2 
msmpeg4 wmv1 wmv2 rawvideo pcm_s16le pcm_s16be pcm_u16le pcm_u16be pcm_s8 
pcm_u8 pcm_alaw pcm_mulaw
  Decoders: rawvideo h263 mpeg4 msmpeg4v1 msmpeg4v2 msmpeg4 wmv1 wmv2 
mpegvideo h263i rv10 svq1 mjpeg mp2 mp3 ac3 pcm_s16le pcm_s16be pcm_u16le 
pcm_u16be pcm_s8 pcm_u8 pcm_alaw pcm_mulaw
Supported file protocols: file: pipe: udp: http:

3. Avaialable under LGPL license.
4. Not done by you, so MS (which as far as I understand - knows very well 
about it) cannot sue you about this (and frankly - they don't care much).

It's called ffmpeg - and you can get a CVS snapshot from 
www.sf.net/projects/ffmpeg (the web site is a bit outdated but the project 
continues to live, and coming soon - native RTP/RTSP support).

Thanks,
Hetz

Oh - and just like the other guys - IANAL ;)

On Saturday 20 July 2002 20:48, Shane Wright wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been working on a KFile Plugin for ASF media files and I've just read
> the license that comes with the ASF spec.  There are a couple of somewhat
> worrying clauses, copied below...
>
> 2 (c) ...Further, you shall use commercially reasonable efforts to ensure
> that the use or distribution of your Solution, including the Implementation
> as incorporated into your Solution, shall not in any way disclose or reveal
> the information contained in the Specification.
>
> 2 (g) ...your license rights to the Specification are conditioned upon your
> (a) not distributing the Implementation in conjunction with Identified
> Software (as defined below); (b) not using Identified Software (e.g. tools)
> to develop the Implementation; and (c) not distributing the Implementation
> under license terms which would make the Implementation Identified
> Software....    ...Identified Software includes, without limitation, any
> software that requires as a condition of use, modification and/or
> distribution of such software that other software distributed with such
> software (x) be disclosed or distributed in source code form; (y) be
> licensed for the purpose of making derivative works; or (z) be
> redistributable at no charge
>
> Part 2 (d) is also annoying; it says that my 'Solution' (the KFile plugin),
> must implement the Spec in it's entirety; hardly appropriate for its
> purposes.
>
> So, the way I read that, I can't develop the plugin because:
>
> (a) I don't want the implement all of the spec,
> (b) I'm using GPL'd tools to implement it,
> (c) It will be GPL'd when done,
>
>
> The point is, am I reading this wrong?  Is it legal to develop the plugin?
> Alternatively, would it have been legal if I hadn't read the spec and just
> based it purely on xine's ASF/WMV code?
>
> If its not possible to implement it, I'll stop (nothing's in CVS yet), and
> I'll remove the entry from the 3.1 feature plan.
>
> btw, if anyone wants to read the full thing, it's downloadable from
> http://www.microsoft.com/asf/
>
> Cheers