Request for clarification on licensing remediation and repository restoration plan (DMCA takedown impact)

[raphaelscholle]

Hi @HermanChen,

I’m opening this issue as a downstream developer relying on Rockchip MPP for image builds in the OpenHD project.

GitHub recently disabled the official MPP repository and all forks due to a DMCA takedown notice, citing:

• LGPL license violations
• removed copyright headers and missing attribution
• FFmpeg-derived decoder files being redistributed under an Apache license

This has now blocked many dependent build pipelines across the open-source ecosystem.

I fully understand you are not the original cause of this, but I’m hoping you might be able to clarify the expected path forward.

If possible, could you provide any insight on:

1. Is Rockchip planning to remediate the licensing issues raised in the DMCA notice?
2. If yes, what steps are likely to be taken?
   (e.g. restoring original copyright headers, attribution, re-licensing affected components under LGPL-compatible terms, or restructuring/removing affected files)
3. Do you have visibility on a rough timeline or milestone for this work?
4. Do you expect the repository to be restored publicly on GitHub once resolved?
5. Are there plans for a future audit of codec/decoder code provenance and license compliance to avoid similar issues?

Even a high-level direction or roadmap would already help downstream projects adjust and plan their builds accordingly.

My goal is not to assign blame — only to understand the plan forward, so that OpenHD and other OSS projects can stay compatible and legally compliant.

Thank you for maintaining MPP and taking the time to look into this. Any guidance you can share would be greatly appreciated by the community right now.

Best regards,
Raphael

[HeyMeco]

I would like to know this too

[henkwiedig]

OpenIPC SBC image builds are also affected.

[HermanChen]

@raphaelscholle @henkwiedig Thank you for chosing MPP : )
We have sent the counter-notification also commit the license patch fff87da.
We always keep all the MPP source code open and have no intend to close it.

[HeyMeco]

@HermanChen I don’t know much about the details of LGPL license nor am I a lawyer but supposedly this might not be enough?

If not is this just the beginning and will commits follow to dynamically link to the FFmpeg parts in MPP or are there plans to relicense MPP completely?

[HermanChen]

Then main difference is that when MPP code is pure Apache you can do anything like dynamic and static link and your code has no need but when Apache and LGPL and mixed the Apache will become LGPL and LGPL will let you static linked code need to be open.

[HeyMeco]

Understood so the Apache aspect of commercially closing down the end result is being "lost" and cannot be done as long as the LGPL code is used here. Since Rockchip distributes MPP open and able to modify this is being correctly applied under the mix of Apache and LPGL becoming LPGL and whoever uses MPP can’t lock it down which normally Apache would allow.

A suggestion then: The MPP Readme should include a section where it explicitly says that MPP as a whole is distributed as LGPL as it uses parts of FFMPEG even if the Rockchip code is provided as Apache

[TuxCoder]

The https://github.com/HermanChen/mpp/blob/develop/debian/copyright file is still wrong.
Please fix this to avoid another DMCA takedown:

[HermanChen]

The https://github.com/HermanChen/mpp/blob/develop/debian/copyright file is still wrong. Please fix this to avoid another DMCA takedown:

How to fix? Is it ok to add LGPL statement here for these version with mix license code?

[HermanChen]

Understood so the Apache aspect of commercially closing down the end result is being "lost" and cannot be done as long as the LGPL code is used here. Since Rockchip distributes MPP open and able to modify this is being correctly applied under the mix of Apache and LPGL becoming LPGL and whoever uses MPP can’t lock it down which normally Apache would allow.

A suggestion then: The MPP Readme should include a section where it explicitly says that MPP as a whole is distributed as LGPL as it uses parts of FFMPEG even if the Rockchip code is provided as Apache

OK, will add the NOTE in later patch.

[WoodenGlaze]

Is there any legitimate reason for the copyright banner in the FFmpeg files to say rockchip holds rights?

you guys have no rights to that code, until you resolve the licensing issue, which also means that that copyright notice.

[HermanChen]

@raphaelscholle The latest patch b13eb80 move all parser to libmpp_ext.so, All codec will be auto loaded on startup.
Just put libmpp_ext.so on the same path with libmpp.so

[HermanChen]

@WoodenGlaze The latest version fcfd59d remove all the FFmpeg LGPL code. You can help to review the code. We are also inviting ffmpeg guys to help. Do you know anyone else can help?

[nyanmisaka]

It's best to open a ticket at https://code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/issues and have them review the updated code.