Is this legal? VLC Lib trespass?

[klaas2]

Dear VLC,

I start this topic because I like to use VLClib API also in a closed source application but first thought this was not possible because of the GPL. Then i came by this application that uses VLC in a commercial program, so i was interested if i could use it the same way they do? Or are they doing something illegal?

I tested their application and with their installer you get the option to download VLC and install it... i'm not sure if they use any headers with the lib API..

Below the message i send them and a short reply:
--------------------------------
Dear Bintube,
I was wondering how it is possible you use VLCLib in this "commercial" application? If you compile libvlc in your program, then the whole program is GPL? I hope you can provide me with some detailed information, because I don't want to be the 'bad' guy. I will open a ticket on this on VLC but i was just waiting on some feedback from you people first.
Greatings,
Klaas
--------------------------------
reply:
--------------------------------
Hi Klaas,
BinTube Usenet Reader uses VLC for video playback, but it’s not compiled against it. BinTube Usenet Reader use the external API exposed by VLC for this purpose. Furthermore, no portion of VLC is distributed by or included in BinTube Usenet Reader. It’s absolutely not required to have VLC installed to use BinTube Usenet Reader. We leave it to the end user to install VLC if they choose to.

Cheers.
The BinTube Team
www.bintube.com
--------------------------------


I'm no lawyer and unfortunately don't have the money to ask on for advice (regarding my own implementation)
I thought that any use of the lib API would mean your code has to be GPL...

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Well, if you use libVLC now, you need to be GPL. (Note, this might change in the future)
If you use other ways (like ActiveX), you might not need to be GPL

[klaas2]

So... these people are not right? they use it now
They use this in a commercial program!

[klaas2]

After reading a old post from Big-Ben, i think i understand:

According to my understanding of the GPL, if your activex module can only run with VLC, it has to be written in a GPL compatible license. If its functions are not VLC specific, and it can also be run with some other non gpl media player, things are different (but you still wouldn't be able to distribute your module along with VLC in the same package). However, note that BSD and LGPL are GPL compatible license. But keep in mind that the complete package (you app + VLC) would then still be GPL. That means that you still wouldn't be able to link your app with proprietary software, if it is distributed along with VLC (but it will be allowed to reuse the code in another LGPL/BSD app, that has nothing to do with VLC, and that link with proprietary software, or to reuse LGPL/BSD existing code in that
module).

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

It's simpler than that. If (as they claim) they don't provide VLC themselves, then they are not bound to its (GPL) license in any way.

It would be much different if they included libvlc in their software installer.

[klaas2]

It's simpler than that. If (as they claim) they don't provide VLC themselves, then they are not bound to its (GPL) license in any way.

It would be much different if they included libvlc in their software installer.

I intend to use LibVLC API in the same kind of way, if people like to use it next to the application we develop. (just a option if you have VLC installed on your Machine)
For own coding interest is using LibVLC type and function declarations from vlc headers with closed source project a violation of GPL?

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

I believe not but I am not a copyright lawyer. It depends if the result is derived work or not.