[gst-devel] Copyright headers need updating

frazier at velocitus.net frazier at velocitus.net
Tue Jan 24 13:12:02 CET 2006

> On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 12:56 -0800, Erik Walthinsen wrote:
> I've been noticing a lot of files in CVS still list a copyright year
> of  1999 with my ancient OGI email address.  I'm thinking that should
> probably be updated.... ;-)
> The funny thing is when people make a new file they just copy over
> everything from some other one to get boilerplate ;)
>> Thoughts?

I prefer for there to be lots of copyright holders or a FSF hold on
copyright when recommending open software for commercial use.  The reasons
for this are simple:
1. Fear of changing licensing terms ala MySQL. I wouldn't want to invest
time and code towards a given code base and then have the rules change.
One copyright holder makes changing the rules later easy.
2. I'm not fond of dual licensing both as free GPL and paying for
proprietary use. QT libraries are most famous for this, and it makes sure
that, from the perspective of the commercial development, you're still
tied to commercial vendor for most all practical purposes. Also, since
closed builds are not available publicly, it allows for a competitor to
buy an advantage. A firm GPL or LGPL keeps people honest, whereas the
ability to dual license provides for side deals.

Anyway, my preference is lots of copyright holders, or a FSF assignment.

Also, I think the whole Fluendo professional services addition makes
GStreamer more appealing. If all the copyrights were assigned only to
people at Fluendo, or Fluendo itself, that would lessen the appeal
however. Again, it's all about knowing the licensing terms are going to
stay the same, and that everyone gets the same deal.

Regardless, nice to see the project is running strong. I probably ought to
dig though archives and give you guys both a bigger and a raster version
of the GStreamer logo.

-Brock Frazier
 Boise, Idaho  USA

More information about the gstreamer-devel mailing list