Posted by drupalnuts on July 30, 2008 at 9:34pm
In the readme file for this module it says you have to download http://www.jeroenwijering.com/?item=JW_FLV_Player
However, that is a non-gpl item? Is this allowed?
In the readme file for this module it says you have to download http://www.jeroenwijering.com/?item=JW_FLV_Player
However, that is a non-gpl item? Is this allowed?
Comments
Non-PHP code
The JW FLash player is, as its name implies, a Flash app, not a PHP app. Drupal talks to it through established inter-process communication mechanisms (vis, it writes HTML that tells the browser to call the JW player and a given video file). Because it is communicating with the flash player as a separate program, it is not considered a "derivative work" but simply two separate works that talk to each other. Therefore, the above module is allowed. See FAQ #10.
That said, I agree that Drupal modules requiring a non-Free 3rd party module is uncooth. Unfortunately there is a shortage of good open source flash video players right now. I've been trying to find one that is "fully Free" and properly maintained, and have been unsuccessful. This is a situation that does really need to change at some point, not just for Drupal but for the Flash video world in general.
I agree that Drupal modules
Crell, this is exactly the sort of mentality that makes open source enthusiasts -- I won't use Fake Steve Jobs' word for these people, but you know what it is -- unbearable at times. There's nothing uncouth at all about having several choices to fulfill a computing need, and being able to select the one that works the best for the circumstances -- whether it's open source, closed source, or even (gasp!) commercial. When people have this attitude that commercial or non-open software is an unfortunate occurrence, they're not only unrealistic; they're swimming upstream of the very freedom they say they strive for.
The Boise Drupal Guy!
"Requiring" is the key word
An open source project that can work with non-Free products is fine (subject to the legal restrictions on distribution). I am referring to an open source system that simply doesn't work without a non-Free system. That can be legal, and I am not claiming that it is unethical, but it is, at the very least, quite annoying. It's extra paperwork, cost, and mental overhead to deal with. One of the pragmatic advantages of using open source is not having to count your licenses.