Licensing questions

Question

I'm including a copy of ffmpeg, and probably GPG too. I will be calling them as subprocesses from a python app I'm creating.

I'm distributing this and I'm wondering a) since I'm not using the library, I'm simply executing both programs within the python app, I do not have to release the source to my app right? b) do I need to obtain licenses for codecs? I'm using ffmpeg to let users convert their videos to h.264 and AAC before sending them to me.

Thanks, Chris

Answer 1

I don't think you need to release your source, as you're not modifying them or using them to create derivative works, merely executing them. It's just like you don't need to open source your code if you write a script file.

However, you will probably need to make available a copy of the source code for FFMPEG and GPL if you plan on distributing them, and a copy of the appropriate license.

Answer 2

No legal advice on licenses here, but :

If you want to be on the safe side, I would suggest to not 'include' your copy of ffmpeg (instead let the user himself configure/install this part, just list and document it as a dependency).

Another advantage: that way (in most linux distro's) you also don't have to worry about ffmpeg upgrades / dependencies etc.

Answer 3

A copy of your source? No.

Properly license the codecs? Yes. And more.

This should be readily apparent when you build the binaries when ./configure reports "nonfree and unredistributable" after including x264 and AAC codecs in your build. Both h264 and AAC are covered by a murky patent and licensing cloud. Read up on it.

ffmpeg itself is an issue with the LGPL / GPL licensing drama.

Some starting points:

• ffmpeg's legal FAQ
• Daring Fireball blog post: Some Facts About AAC
• Via Licensing: AAC licensing fees schedule
• Streamingmedia.com's Back to Basics: H.264 Licensing Terms

If you want to be safe, and don't have the time/resources to deal with licensing, then do what ChristopheD says and let the user bother with the installation of ffmpeg.