[davilla]

That's the only thing that requires an API key at the moment, and that might change. If we didn't have a key, then someone could write an iOS app and put it in the store for free, leveraging all our hard work on the server, and then our supply of beer money might dry up, and a lack of beer makes us sad. So you might think of it as evil and closed and secretive and scary and (did I mention evil?) but the handful of developers who are working with us on third party applications see it as an opportunity.

Evil, no. Secretive and scary, HAHA, don't make me snort milk. Closed, yes. Open Platform, no. Opportunities come in many shapes and sizes.

So far, Plex is now one of at least four companies that play the transcode/streaming game. More will enter that market as the limitations of video decode become apparent with ultra-thin clients. By the way, you did budget in for MPEG LA license fees for decode, encode and streaming h264, right. As a commercial company now, it's the smart thing to do to keep from getting hit with that nasty legal action that might take some of that beer money away. Same for IMDB, like Boxee did on day one. Oh wait, how's that going, someone forget a budget item ?

[hrcolb0]

I guess they forgot about the imdb license.

[spiff]

i also assume you use your own h264 encoder, since x264 is gpl licensed? and i assume you honor the lgpl/gpl terms of ffmpeg. if you use it under lgpl, you cannot link it statically, a user must be able to replace the library used.

[stueng]

its gone vewwy quiet

[pecinko]

By the way, you did budget in for MPEG LA license fees for decode, encode and streaming h264, right. As a commercial company now, it's the smart thing to do to keep from getting hit with that nasty legal action that might take some of that beer money away.

If XBMC decides in future to make better support for slim clients, would it also be obliged to obtain licenses? In other words - would streaming from XBMC to say 3 slim units _inside my house_ be possible without need to solve license things?

[davilla]

If XBMC decides in future to make better support for slim clients, would it also be obliged to obtain licenses? In other words - would streaming from XBMC to say 3 slim units _inside my house_ be possible without need to solve license things?

XBMC is not commercial, for profit company. Plex is. When you start being a commercial company, then you need to start thinking about proper licenses for these things.

[pecinko]

I may not get an answer to this but I'll ask anyway. Elan, are you planning on eventually rewriting the Mac front end so it doesn't use the XBMC codebase?

Judging from forum posts there, they would like to and are preparing changes to skinning engine for some time. They just need Xbmc code support so that they can save time and evolve faster. And they need easy way to port skins.

I think it's only a matter of time Plex will completely go closed source. APIs will be (openly) available so you can write plugins, of course :-)

If you look at it logically it's the only way they could choose, with XBMC and Boxee around and with possibility for them to use Plex code, in time, they would end short.

That's why devs here are pissed up cause someone took all the hard work without contributing in any way and, on the other side, Plex devs are silently smiling cause they (finally) have something to differentiate them.

Although somebody could call this parasitization, in our modern age that kind of morality gets often exorcized with -well, life's a bitch...-

To get back on topic I do think that moving of content management (with possible streaming capabilities) from front end is a good way to go. It was necessity on xbox, now it could be left only in LIVE distro. UI would rejoice and new possibilities would open. I also like idea of keeping sqlite and solving library sharing with xmls. Maybe this could be accomplished in cooperation with Boxee devs. That would be Plex killer.

[ashlar]

Is Plex giving money to the XBMC team? I surely hope so.

[davilla]

Is Plex giving money to the XBMC team? I surely hope so.

Not one red cent nor do they contribute any code back.

[Jezz_X]

Not one red cent nor do they contribute any code back.

And nor do we really want it all we have ever wanted from day one from plex was to make sure they abide by our gpl licence and to give recognition of the roots of the project

[osirisjem]

From the site: http://www.plexapp.com/credits.php

Plex is based on XBMC.

XBMC: The most important one, since Plex is based on XBMC code. We forked several months ago, and continue to pull bug-fixes and new features, albeit in a controlled fashion.

I didn't think it would be allowed to just use XBMC code in a project, and get people to pay for it. Why is that allowed ? Isn't that leveraging years of people's time and energy .... just to profit for yourself ? Does XBMC have the right to say "No" to people using the codebase ? I thought if you used any of the code, you would have to make your code available as well. Please enlighten me.

[davilla]

From the site: http://www.plexapp.com/credits.php

Plex is based on XBMC.



I didn't think it would be allowed to just use XBMC code in a project, and get people to pay for it. Why is that allowed ? Isn't that leveraging years of people's time and energy .... just to profit for yourself ? Does XBMC have the right to say "No" to people using the codebase ? I thought if you used any of the code, you would have to make your code available as well. Please enlighten me.

LOL, "forked several months ago" more like several years ago and they have not cherry picked much in the last six months or so. Their git tree is here (http://github.com/elan/plex), not much going on as they really want to move to a private source client for osx that they say would not be based on XBMC code. Plex2.

GPL lets you do what you want provided you release source code that matches any binaries you release. The idea is that anyone can build a replacement binary from this source code. Good luck building from this tree. Its missing critical information on how to build the support libs or even what source code versions they were based from. Plex devs don't really care about the GPL concept except to marginally abide by the GPL license and to use it to further their goals which is moving to private source code that can support a commercial for profit business model. They are about 1/2 way there right now.

[pecinko]

their goals which is moving to private source code that can support a commercial for profit business model. They are about 1/2 way there right now.

Despite of this fact, there are lot of people there, working their asses of, believing they contribute skins and plugins for good thing... With good PR you travel far :-)

[Dullie]

IMHO If plex makes money from using XBMC code/skins/ and even the know-how. XBMC should as well. Especially when it comes to skins. I dont think they have any of their own, mostly ported from XBMC. So, the designers should get paid, big time.

[Jezz_X]

IMHO If plex makes money from using XBMC code/skins/ and even the know-how. XBMC should as well. Especially when it comes to skins. I dont think they have any of their own, mostly ported from XBMC. So, the designers should get paid, big time.

While I do find it annoying that they keep just poaching our skins directly with little to no changes aside from compatibility instead of making their own original ones and then essentially claiming them as plex original http://elan.plexapp.com/2010/08/27/showi...t-of-skin/ (no mentioning the original authors at all or that they are ports and announcing it as a feature)

But on the lighter side they do have 2 skins being made just for them now so hopefully they will stop taking ours