Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 200 posts

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#101

Post by LeFantome »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #24
merlindru wrote: post #2

The repo in question incorporated FFmpeg code while claiming their code is Apache 2.0-licensed over 1.5 years ago[1] This is not allowed under the LGPL, which mandates dynamic linking against the library. They copy-pasted FFmpeg code into their repo instead. [1] https://x.com/HermanChen1982/status/1761230920563233137

What happens when you want to mix two libraries with different licences?

This depends on the licenses.

Copyleft licenses are designed to prevent you mixing code as the licenses are generally incompatible with mixing.

More permissive license will generally allow you to mix licenses. This is why you can ship permissive code in a proprietary code base.

As for linking, “weak copyleft” license allow you to link but not to “mix” code. This is essentially the point of the LGPL.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#102

Post by Nextgrid »

pico303 wrote: post #89
meindnoch wrote: post #78

[flagged]

Maybe I’m not smart enough to grasp all these flowery words, but is this suggesting if I spend a few years writing some code, you should get to copy it for your own interests and without compensating me as long as your sales and marketing is better than mine? I don’t think Rockchip learned from the ffmoeg code. They simply copied it outright without attribution.

> if I spend a few years writing some code, you should get to copy it for your own interests

If you publish the code, there's an argument to be made that yes, others should freely use it: if you could (or did) monetize the code yourself you wouldn't publish it. If you didn't, or failed trying to monetize it, maybe it's better for society if everyone else also gets to try?

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#103

Post by LeFantome »

observationist wrote: post #61
bfrog wrote: post #39

I wonder how this will work with AI stuff generating code without any source or attribution. It’s not like the LLMs make this stuff up out of thin air it comes from source material.

Best case scenario is it nukes the whole concept of software patents and the whole ugly industry of copyright hoarding. The idea that perpetual rent-seeking is a natural extension and intended outcome of the legal concepts of copyrights and patents is bizarre.

I cannot imagine it somehow impacts parents.

Copyright and patents are completely independent concepts.

The “perpetual” part is the issue but “rent seeking” is the entire reason that copyright and patents exist to begin with.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#104

Post by neilv »

alienbaby wrote: post #59
bfrog wrote: post #39

I wonder how this will work with AI stuff generating code without any source or attribution. It’s not like the LLMs make this stuff up out of thin air it comes from source material.

Llm's do not verbatim disgorge chunks of the code they were trained on.

They do, and, early on, Microsoft (and perhaps others) put in some checks to try to hide that.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#105

Post by Telaneo »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #95
meindnoch wrote: post #78

[flagged]

This perfectly summarizes my feeling about software licenses. I've always found it beyond ridiculous. Either you post your code in public and you accept it'll be used by others, without any enforceable restriction, or you don't. It's as simple as that. The rest is self-importance from bitter old men.

> I've always found it beyond ridiculous. Either you post your code in public and you accept it'll be used by others, without any enforceable restriction, or you don't. It's as simple as that.

If we can have this, but for everything, so films, books, TV, music and everything else, I'd agree. This however is not the world we live in. The amount of culture we could have from people remixing the past 50 years worth of culture would be incredible. Instead, we're stuck with the same stuff we were over 70 years ago.

The amount of progress we could make in software is probably on a similar level, but the problem is the same as it is with the cultural artefacts. So instead we're stuck in a world where money makes right, since you need money to uphold the laws intended to protect Intellectual Property™. I can't blame ffmpeg for working within the rules of the system, even if the system sucks.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#106

Post by beardbound »

ranger_danger wrote: post #70
bfrog wrote: post #39

I wonder how this will work with AI stuff generating code without any source or attribution. It’s not like the LLMs make this stuff up out of thin air it comes from source material.

Everything humans make up also comes from source material. The real (legal) question in either case, is how much is actually copied, and how obvious is it.

I mostly agree with you, but if a human straight up copies work under copyright they’re violating the law. Seems like a LLM should be held to the same standard unless they should be even less beholden to the law than people.

It’s also incredibly hard to tell if a LLM copied something since you can’t ask it in court and it probably can’t even tell you if it did.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#107

Post by kstrauser »

amszmidt wrote: post #51
papercrane wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DMCA notice is available here: https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2025/12/2025-12-1... The notice has a list of files and says that they were copied from ffmpeg, removed the original copyright notice, added their own and licensed under the more permissive Apache license.

Thanks for the link; sadly none of the links to the repo can be viewed to see what exactly occurred. To those downvoting, curious why? Many of the links are not viewable, since GitHub hides them, so any discussion becomes quite tricky.

I didn't downvote. I suspect people did because it sounded like you were defending ILoveRockchip's actions, based on either 1) not understanding what they did, and/or 2) not having access to the facts. People get snippy about abusing Free Software.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#108

Post by iLoveOncall »

Telaneo wrote: post #105
iLoveOncall wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This perfectly summarizes my feeling about software licenses. I've always found it beyond ridiculous. Either you post your code in public and you accept it'll be used by others, without any enforceable restriction, or you don't. It's as simple as that. The rest is self-importance from bitter old men.

> I've always found it beyond ridiculous. Either you post your code in public and you accept it'll be used by others, without any enforceable restriction, or you don't. It's as simple as that. If we can have this, but for everything, so films, books, TV, music and everything else, I'd agree. This however is not the world we live in. The amount of culture we could have from people remixing the past 50 years worth of c…

Code is not culture, nor art. I'm not sure why you'd want to compare them.

Re: FFmpeg has issued a DMCA takedown on GitHub

#109

Post by iinnPP »

martin-t wrote: post #93
iinnPP wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had to deal with a ministry in Canada, where a worker who had been there since 20 years ago failed even a basic test of competence in reading comprehension. Then multiple issues with the OPC (Office of Privacy Commissioner) failing entirely on a basic issue. Another example exists in Ontario's tenant laws constantly being criticized as enabling bad tenant behavior, but reading the statute full of many mont…

Incompetence is a taboo. It shouldn't be. I think it should be perfectly OK to make value judgements of other people, and if they are backed by evidence, make them publicly and make them have consequences for that person's position.

A recent review of one of Canada's Federal Institutions showed the correct advice was given 17% of the time[0]. 83% failure rate. Not a soul has been fired unless something changed recently.

I do agree however with your assessment because any (additional) accountability would improve matters.

[0] https://globalnews.ca/news/11487484/cra-tax-service-calls-au...

Post reply on HN