On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Benjamin Henrion <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Simos Xenitellis > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Benjamin Henrion <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Quink <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I have communicated with the author of source code of libvdecoder.so. >>>> The code has been rewrote completely, has no relationship with FFmpeg, >>> >>> I don't think it would resist a binary analysis. >>> >> >> Doesn't pass the code of conduct (for example, >> http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/conduct). > > I don't see how I am violating any code of conduct here, quite the contrary. >
The issue is that you *insinuate* that the claim (no relationship with FFmpeg) is false. What would be the next step to such a discussion? The one side claims no, the other yes, ad infinitum. For this to go forward, you or someone else needs to do this "binary analysis". Once the binary analysis is done and you have something to show, you can reply with your data. In that way, such a discussion could potentially move forward. In terms of "code of conduct" documents, the idea is, when replying, to move a discussion forward. If a thread veers off, then change the Subject:, thus start a new thread. If you find any evidence of common binary code, you can present it respectfully and still it is going to be strong evidence (i.e. I did "arm-linux-gnueabihf-objdump -d libvdecoder.so" and the same to that other lib, and function xyz matches as shown here and here). Simos > I was maintaining the ISL3893 project 10 years ago, where one of the > vendor was sued in court in Germany for not giving out the sources: > > http://isl3893.sourceforge.net/ > > But that was on the action of copyright holders at the time (Harald Welte). > > -- > Benjamin Henrion <bhenrion at ffii.org> > FFII Brussels - +32-484-566109 - +32-2-4148403 > "In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software > patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy. > Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of > software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent > court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their > favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or > democratically elected legislators." > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "linux-sunxi" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
