x264 is distributed under GPL licence and according to this just changing the naming convention does't mean the different code. many tools are available to analyse such kind of violations. moreover if any software include the open source module in their software then this whole new software has to be under GPL . companies don't do this kindly of things becuase the legal penalties could lead the liquadation of compnay (very high price for any company)<BR><BR><B><I>farooq Ahmad <videogenie@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">What will be the legal status of companies that just modify naming <BR>conventions for variables as well as functions but keep similar code <BR>structure? Will that code be considered their proprietary implementation? <BR>What are the licensing issues in using x264 current implementation.<BR><BR>Regards<BR>The Video
Genie<BR><BR>_________________________________________________________________<BR>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! <BR>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/<BR><BR>-- <BR>This is the x264-devel mailing-list<BR>To unsubscribe, go to: http://developers.videolan.org/lists.html<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><p> 
<hr size=1>Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman1/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com">Make PC-to-Phone Calls</a> to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.