3 ms·
You can't really expect anyone that is distributing software free of charge to get a laywer to understand the (L)GPL. As I see it, everyone is on the same side
by Confusion 17y ago
You can't really expect anyone that is distributing software free of charge to get a laywer to understand the (L)GPL. As I see it, everyone is on the same side here, donating free time to create software that is offered free of charge. I don't see how that warrants rudeness.
- DarkShikari 17y agoFree of charge? He charges $399 for a premium version (which consists almost entirely of ripped-off open source software), and you think he doesn't have money to pay a lawyer?
- pavlov 17y agoBased on the linked issue thread, the MediaCoder author also makes money by bundling commercial crapware in the "free" version's installer.
- Steve0 17y agoOpen source is/was never about the money. It's about the freedom of having the source. The license is pretty easy and simple if you distribute your modified soft with the same open source licence. The concept of the gpl is: I show you my code, if you show me yours. It's about sharing and repriocity. It's not about snatching the nice tools built by the community, putting a nice gui layer and some extra features on it and closing the source. The fastest way for our friend here to adhere to the license is dropping ffmpeg or releasing his code as gpl. He doesn't seem to be willing to do that. How would you like people who copy your sourcecode without permission and sell it to anyone?