Help wanted for interface with binary (non-free) library

[shrikel]

I'm working with a company that wants to use VLC with a non-free video decoder. The codec developers are unwilling to release it as open-source, but are willing to license a binary decoding library to our company. We're therefore looking for somebody who can build us a module that uses this binary to decode a video stream. If you are interested, please contact me via email or IM. If you have any questions or would like clarification, let's discuss stuff in this forum so everyone can see. (I'm unable to give out any details about the codec without an NDA though, so don't ask. ) The system we're planning will be running solely on Linux (2.6+), which may further simplify matters.

It seems to me like it is a relatively trivial project. But I'm not a programmer myself (haven't done much since Pascal was in vogue, anyway), and I particularly am not a codec expert, so please let me know if there are limitations or difficulties here that I'm likely unaware of.

I wish we could offer some useful code to the world, but at least we'll be able to put some money in the pocket of one of you dedicated open-source coders.

Thanks in advance!

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Well, sorry, but that is not possible and ILLEGAL.
Any code linked to VLC has to be GPL.
So sorry

[shrikel]

Any code linked to VLC has to be GPL.

I recognize that derivative works of VLC must be made available under the GPL. However, GPL code can certainly make calls to non-GPL libraries. That would be the case here -- the VLC module (licensed under GPL) would be calling on the non-GPL decoding library to do some work. Since the decoding library is stand-alone and not a derivative work of VLC, it does not need to be GPLed also. Of course the VLC module itself would have to be GPL (as a derivative work), I see that. But it would be calling on an external library which is NOT GPLed. Does that alleviate the concern here?

Of course, the module will be useless without the non-free library it relies on, but that's immaterial to the argument that the non-GPL library itself can be used without becoming GPL-licensed. Right?

[shrikel]

From the GPL:

[statements requiring derivative works to be released under the GPL]...

These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works.

As will be the case here.

(I don't mean to be a prig... I just had to go make sure that I was understanding things correctly. )

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Well, to create a "module", you need to use vlc headers, so, to my knowledge, this is derivated work, but I may mistake.

Please, private me or come to IRC.