Hi rolandoo,

Zeranoe FFmpeg builds可以說就是FFmpeg這個開源專案(https://www.ffmpeg.org/index.html)在windows平台上的轉化版本，其本上它的授權狀態是要承繼原FFmpeg專案的方式，所以、如果要探知Zeranoe FFmpeg builds的授權狀態及應用方式，我們可以直接參照FFmpeg專案上的說明！

FFmpeg是一個很成熟的自由開源軟體專案，其網站上特別設有Legal這個分頁，在這個頁面上、其大抵把FFmpeg被許多人關心的授權議題都做了基本的解釋：https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html

所以、以下就重點引述FFmpeg Legal頁面的內容，再加上部份的分析來解答您的問題。

問題一、使用32-bit Builds (Dev)版本的Zeranoe FFmpeg在專案裡，透過Library Linking的方式來與其互動，是否會違反著作權法呢？

不會、FFmpeg是一個成熟的自由開源軟體專案，它大部份的程式碼都是以LGPL-2.1及其後版本的方式對外釋出，這表示下載者可以依照LGPL-2.1+的遊戲規則自由地安裝使用、修改、重製、散布這個專案；然而、要特別注意的是，FFmpeg裡部份非必要的增效檔案是採用授權拘束性較嚴格的GPL-2.0及其後版本釋出的，如果您取用的專案內容包括這些以GPL-2.0+授權的檔案，那麼理論上此時取用的FFmpeg專案會改為以GPL-2.0+的方式來授權，而如果您個人撰寫的程式碼與這個GPL-2.0+授權的FFmpeg專案是以靜態連結(static link)或是其他緊密的連結方式建立存取關係的話，那麼整個專案解釋上就會變成GPL-2.0+授權元件的衍生著作(derivative work)，而必須要在後續散布時，一體適用GPL-2.0+的遊戲規則來提供程式源碼，進一步這方面的相關資訊，可參照拙著，「GPL 條款對於衍生程式的判定標準與其授權拘束性的擴散範圍（下）」：https://www.openfoundry.org/tw/legal-column-list/8447-the-license-inheritance-bounds-of-gnu-gpl-02

以下為FFmpeg專案授權內容的重要節錄(https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html)

----

FFmpeg License

FFmpeg is licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) version 2.1 or later. However, FFmpeg incorporates several optional parts and optimizations that are covered by the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or later. If those parts get used the GPL applies to all of FFmpeg.

FFmpeg是以LGPL-2.1及其後版本的方式來授權的。然後、FFmpeg專案裡也結合了幾個具「選擇性／非必要安裝性」，或是最佳化效能的元件，這些元件是採GPL-2.0及其後版本的方式授權的。所以、如果您取用FFmpeg的方式包含這些非必要性的增效元件，則GPL-2.0+的授權方式會適用到FFmpeg整個專案，而後續FFmpeg就必須依照GPL-2.0+的授權方式向後散布。

----

問題二、32-bit Builds (Dev)版本的Zeranoe FFmpeg，可否植入並適用在商業性販售的裝置或是產品裡呢？

植入商用裝置的話，則專利侵權方面的風險性很高。關於這部份，FFmpeg專案的授權頁面下緣也已經做了簡明扼要的解釋了(https://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html)。這些說明內容約略有以下幾個要點：

1、FFmpeg的程式碼是由其開發團隊在沒有參照其他專案程式碼的狀況下，集眾人之力撰寫的成果，並採用LGPL-2.1+或是GPL-2.0+的方式向外釋出，其在著作權法(copyright)的層面上並沒有問題。

2、然而、近代的軟體授權，除了著作權的授權範圍外，還有軟體專利(software patent)方面的風險！FFmpeg團隊表示其並沒有參照其他已被專利化的演算法來撰寫程式，然而、這並不能保障其所撰寫出來的技術方法，100％沒有類似他人已申請專利範圍的狀況，已知可能涉及的例如有H.264的線上串流影音撥放專利、MPEG-4的多媒體檔案壓縮專利，就這部份的專利問題、FFmpeg團隊並沒有去進行地毯式的專利檢索，故使用FFmepg專案之後會不會涉及專利侵權的爭議，這部份原開發團隊並沒有辦法予以保障。

3、所以、如果是個人式的非商使用的話，那原則上不會有專利侵權相關的問題，因為專利權的侵權原則上是僅在商業利用行為時會產生，並且個人使用的狀態上，侵害他人專利的幅度與範圍也甚是輕微，不大可能形成一個嚴重的司法爭訟。然而、若是要將FFmpeg包裹到商業產品裡面進行販售，那麼FFmpeg團隊請大家注意專利上的問題，可能必須先和某些擁有特定專利權的公司先行取得專利授權，例如MPEG LA就其H.264專利的侵權查緝就非常積極且主動，這部份是商用FFmpeg使用者所需要特別注意的。

專利方面的引述全文貼附如下，希望這些回覆內容對您有所幫助，如有後續問題，歡迎接續討論。

順心健康

20120503 1610 LUCIEN C.H. LIN

----

Patent Mini-FAQ

A lot of legal questions surrounding patents arise when discussing multimedia technology. This mini-FAQ attempts to address these issues. Note that much of this discussion is based on precedent, or what has happened in the past under similar circumstances. Very little consideration is given to what could happen. If you use your imagination, you can visualize any dire scenario and cease doing any productive work.

Q: Does FFmpeg use patented algorithms?
A: We do not know, we are not lawyers so we are not qualified to answer this. Also we have never read patents to implement any part of FFmpeg, so even if we were qualified we could not answer it as we do not know what is patented. Furthermore the sheer number of software patents makes it impossible to read them all so no one (lawyer or not) could answer such a question with a definite no, those who do lie. What we do know is that various standards FFmpeg supports contain vague hints that any conforming implementation might be subject to some patent rights in some jurisdictions, examples for such statements are:
For H.264:

ITU draws attention to the possibility that the practice or implementation of this Recommendation may involve the use of a claimed Intellectual Property Right. ITU takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of claimed Intellectual Property Rights, whether asserted by ITU members or others outside of the Recommendation development process.

And for MPEG-4:

The user's attention is called to the possibility that, for some of the processes specified in this part of ISO/IEC 14496, conformance with this specification may require use of an invention covered by patent rights. By publication of this part of ISO/IEC 14496, no position is taken with respect to the validity of this claim or of any patent rights in connection therewith.

Q: Is it safe to use such patented algorithms?
A: Patent laws vary wildly between jurisdictions, and in many countries patents on algorithms are not recognized. Plus the use of patents to prevent the usage of a format or codec on a specific operating system or together with specific other software might violate antitrust laws. So whether you are safe or not depends on where you live and how judges interpret the law in your jurisdiction.

Q: Bottom line: Should I be worried about patent issues if I use FFmpeg?
A: Are you a private user working with FFmpeg for your own personal purposes? If so, there is remarkably little reason to be concerned. Are you using FFmpeg in a commercial software product? Read on to the next question...

Q: Is it perfectly alright to incorporate the whole FFmpeg core into my own commercial product?
A: You might have a problem here. There have been cases where companies have used FFmpeg in their products. These companies found out that once you start trying to make money from patented technologies, the owners of the patents will come after their licensing fees. Notably, MPEG LA is vigilant and diligent about collecting for MPEG-related technologies.