What chance iOS will become a supported platform again?

[ziggurism]

I see several threads in this forum from people trying to get VLC compiled for iOS, usually without success. It seems that there isn't much developer support for this platform. This is unfortunate, because at one time there was a third party shop (Applidium) willing to port and maintain a build of VLC on the App Store. Rémi Denis-Courmont had this version pulled from the App Store in early 2011 because he believed the App Store's terms of use were incompatible with the GPL, despite the fact that Applidium made the source code available. As I recall, there was some disagreement about those legal questions, but Rémi acted unilaterally, sending a notice to Apple, who promptly pulled the app and directed all further questions to Rémi Denis-Courmont.

Today I noticed that VLC is available on the Android Market/Google Play store. Presumably the Google Play app store terms of service are similarly unclear surrounding GPL issues. For example, I see this sentence "you may not attempt to modify any Products obtained through Google Play" which surely seems problematic. Why is the Google Play store ok, but the Apple store is not? Does this mean that Remi has softened from his hardline stance on allowing their GPLed app to be downloaded from DRMed app stores? I saw a message on the mailing list that seemed to suggest that Remi had left the project.

I used to donate to VLC regularly because I rely on their software for my HTPC which is a Mac. I stopped after Remi got the app pulled from the App store. What are the chances of iOS becoming a supported platform again? I'd be happy to start donating again if the developers would support this platform. I guess I'm willing to compile the app myself, if I can have some hope that there will be a functional executable at the end (currently the source seems not to even compile). I'd be even happier if the app could be restored to the App Store. Or if VLC will not or cannot support iOS, then at least they could promise not to interfere with third parties (like Applidium) who wish to do so?

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Google Play store is OK, because it says: "without authorization", which authorization you have on the GPL license when downloading the application. Moreover, Google has explained quite a few times that exceptions are there for FLOSS.

For iOS, I publish, from time to time analysis of the terms, on vlc-devel.
With every update, tt is getting way better, but there is still an obscure point about whether you are allowed or not, to use a Product for "Any Use you want".
Apple has been asked the question several times, but we have no answer so far.
Moreover, we are relicensing VLC's core at the same time, and that might help to improve Apple ToS compatibility.

[fkuehne]

Note that I can't comment on VLC for Android. I'm not involved in that sub project.

We don't interfere with Applidium or other entities. In fact, we are friends with Applidium, a former team mate of us worked with them to port VLC to iOS, etc. However, conforming with the GPL isn't just about publishing source code.

Anyway, we (as in: the VideoLAN association) are working with Apple since April this year to look into ways how to make the App Store's terms and conditions suitable for GPL-licensed software.
These terms are not as static as you might think. Basically, the terms evolved a lot since then and there are only minor issues left.

For example, it seems as if downloads from the App Store are permitted only for companies, educational institutions and end-users. For the latter, it is limited to for personal, non-commercial use. This excludes certain entities such as government agencies, non-profit organizations or individuals doing commercial use. This limitation conflicts with the GPL regardless whether you provide the source code or not. [1]

There is a bigger issue left though. In [2], Apple provides guidance how to do custom licensing agreements, which the GPL would be. Cipher 1 and 2 interfere with the GPL, since these seem to disallow us to say "You can use the application in any legal situation".

[1] this refers to http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/terms.html#APPS
[2] http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/appst ... /minterms/

[ziggurism]

Thank you for explaining, Jean-Baptiste and Felix. Yeah, now that you point them out, it's clear that there are some clauses in Apple's ToS which are incompatible. And surely Remi is not the only one who cares about making sure the legal protections the GPL promises will actually be there should the legal need arise, so VLC shouldn't be put back on the App Store until full compatibility has been confirmed.

And I'm glad to hear that you've been keeping an eye on Apple's App Store terms of service, to see when they may finally become fully compatible. I did actually look on the online archive of vlc-devel to see if there had been any recent posts about the App Store, but I didn't find them. I will look again, and watch that list in the future for updates. Thank you.

But what about Google's terms? Have they been confirmed to be compatible? Jean-Baptiste, you claim that Google Play says "without authorization", but I do not see that. Here's the full quote of that clause at Google's ToS.

You may not remove any watermarks, labels or other legal or proprietary notices included in any Product, and you may not attempt to modify any Products obtained through Google Play, including any modification for the purpose of disguising or changing any indications of the ownership or source of a Product.

When I search the ToS for the phrase "without authorization", I find that occurs only once in the document, in the clause about sale and redistribution. So Google says you may not redistribute unless you have authorization, which the GPL confers, so that's OK.

But the GPL also guarantees the right to modify, whereas the Google Play terms of service explicitly bar that right, seemingly without exception. I still don't understand how Google Play is ok while the Apple App Store is not.

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Read what you quoted, especially about the "for the purpose of disguising or changing any indications of"
Look also in what paragraph this is.

Changing copyright notices is wrong, in all cases, GPL included.

About iOS, what about http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/v ... 87517.html ?

[ziggurism]

But google doesn't say "you may not change copyright notices". They say "you may not modify product, including changing copyright notices". Can you infer that other non-copyright notice modifications are allowed? That's not what it says.

Why the need to be so literal, poring over every letter of Apple's ToS, looking for a single word which might be incompatible, while no discussion at all takes place with regards to google?

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

But google doesn't say "you may not change copyright notices". They say "you may not modify product, including changing copyright notices". Can you infer that other non-copyright notice modifications are allowed? That's not what it says.

It does not say that. Please read all the sentence. Read the topic under which the sentence is written. I've already said that in a previous post, please read it.

Moreover, read the License to Use Products. topic that grants freedom 0 and topic Sale, Distribution or Assignment to Third Parties that grants the other 3 freedoms, when an authorization is given, like in the case of the GPL.

Why the need to be so literal, poring over every letter of Apple's ToS, looking for a single word which might be incompatible, while no discussion at all takes place with regards to google?

Because you are pissed off because VLC is not on the iOS App Store does not give you the right to throw your anger at Google Play Store and to us developers.
The discussion was done for Google App Store several times and was found compatible by many people analyzing it, including on the vlc-devel mailing list.

[ziggurism]

I am very grateful that VLC is again supported on iOS, and have made a donation. Thank you for making that happen, and please accept my apology if my complaining about its lack last year was annoying.

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Don't worry