How do you even manage to break LGPL lmao all it asks for is attribution, which is like a few line changes on your LICENSE file.
post
Most people are unaware that even open source projects have licenses: Permissive license, Strong Copyleft, Weak Copyleft etc.
Some resources:
And all those licenses rely on copyright and IP law.
I just wish each video decoder manufacturer didn't feel the need to create their own API that isn't supported by anything.
It feels counter productive when everyone relies on ffmpeg and there are no proprietary secrets left to protect. Just agree on an open standard that saves time and effort for all companies using it while getting tons of goodwill and positive cosmic vibes and maybe even revenue.
Does this accomplish anything? Was anyone actually relying on this? I'd say the company was just doing it just to publish it, but I've known developers who would certainly use the public repo as the primary copy.
I believe it does. Weakly reciprocal license like LGPL is not equivalent as a permissive license like Apache. I see two main things on the top of my head:
- This ensure that no one can license wash ffmpg and e.g. use rockchip's repo to distribute their own private product based on ffmpeg without publishing their changes
- It ensures proper attribution of the work, which can have an impact on the developer's careers and ffmpeg as a whole.
On top of this, it really should not be complicated to license this code properly (unless rockchip wants to allow point 1, which is illegal)
The tweets in question:


The DMCA repository:
https://github.com/rockchip-linux/mpp
Neither Rockchips English news or their x.com profile has written anything since 2023:
https://www.rock-chips.com/a/en/News/Press_Releases/index.html

They're still active in China though:
https://www.cnx-software.com/2025/07/18/rockchip-unveils-rk3668-10-core-arm-cortex-a730-cortex-a530-soc-with-16-tops-npu-rk182x-llm-vlm-co-processor/
We really need a better answer to stuff like this than DMCA takedowns. They make sense for someone who doesn't want their stuff made available at all, but it's kinda the opposite of what's needed for copyleft violations.
Waiting 2 years seems so gracious, I couldn't even fault them if they did it nearly immediately either.
all 14 comments