[Flac-dev] Should FLAC join Xiph?

Steve Lhomme steve.lhomme at free.fr
Thu Nov 21 11:11:03 PST 2002

Drew Hess wrote:
> Anyway, consider the chances that someone will use the BSD license to make
> proprietary changes to FLAC.  Weigh that against the chances that FLAC

Well, I think going GPL would be too much, only GPL softwares could use 
the library. BSD is too much too because changes in the software world 
(improvements, bugs, backdoors) would not be available to you. Only the 
hardware world is a problem. And usually when they support a format 
they're ready to pay for the development and even the port ot their 

I use a lot the SciTE editor which is BSD-like. Neil Hodgson is working 
full time on it because some company use his (BSDed) libraries in their 
closed software. And they pay the development for improvements or 
modifications. And that's not even in the hardware world !

I think for hardware, dual-licensing is the way to go. You can use a BSD 
license as the second license, but only available to people who pay (or 
any other reward, or nothing) for that version. Otherwise you can create 
your own one (maybe with the help of a lawyer). Just put that clearly in 
your webpage and sources. Noone will be scared of your code anymore :)
A notice like : "Versions of this code are available under another 
license on demand".

> will be an even bigger success if you go with Xiph, and make your choice.
> I think it's a no-brainer.  Go with Xiph!  It'd be a great addition to
> Ogg.
> Just be ready for lots more bug reports :)

What keeps people around Xiph from using FLAC in OGG already and report 
bugs ? If marketing is what you're looking for it's OK. But that would 
be bad to consider people around Xiph so close minded that they would 
use your codec only if you are part of Xiph... *grin*

More information about the Flac-dev mailing list