Unity's Open-Source Double Standard: The Ban of VLC (mfkl.github.io)

Article summary

Unity banned the open-source VLC for Unity integration from their store, citing a policy against assets containing LGPL-licensed code. The ban was enforced despite the presence of other LGPL-licensed assets in the store. The VLC team has since created their own store to distribute the integration. The ban has raised questions about Unity's open-source policies and the enforceability of LGPL licenses in app stores.

Main themes

• LGPL licensing
• Unity store policies
• Open-source software
• App store requirements
• License compliance
• Redistribution obligations
• Viral licensing debate
• Software freedom and restrictions

What commenters say

• The LGPL license is not a viral license and its requirements can be easily met, even for proprietary programs.
• Unity's ban on LGPL-licensed assets is rational due to the difficulty of complying with LGPL requirements in app stores.
• The ban is unfair and selectively enforced, as many other assets in the store contain LGPL-licensed code.
• Unity's policy is intended to simplify the licensing story for assets on the store and maintain trust with users.
• The LGPL license imposes significant obligations on redistributors, which may be a reason for Unity's ban.
• It is technically possible to comply with LGPL requirements, even in app stores, by providing instructions or object files for relinking.
• The ban may be motivated by a desire to avoid competition or responsibility for ensuring compliance with LGPL licenses.
• App stores' requirements, such as code signing and DRM, can create barriers to complying with LGPL licenses.