Speaker unverified: observation

Transcript context

…So you can create a company with LGPL, you can create a company around it. You can do a commercial thing. You don’t have to open source it. So that’s a big, big leap. So you could play video in your game. The problem is I’m a game developer, and I want to play some videos- … and I don’t want to be forced to open source the entire game just to play those videos. So that’s where the, the consulting business, the libVLC LGPL- … allows you to do that. The LGPL, the library GPL as it used to be known, allows you to do that. And FFmpeg is exactly the same. It force… LGPL forces you to give back what you change on this component, this- … library, which is why it’s library GPL. And so you can use FFmpeg as LGPL into, like, any type of application, even non-open source, but you need to give back the modification you did on FFmpeg. Same on libVLC. Is it limiting from an open source perspective to go GPL? Because if your library, if your code is GPL, it means you’re basically discouraging companies from building a business- … around it, right? Is that, is that fair to say?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.