Hacker News Reader

Comment by neodypsis | Hacker News Reader

> I really wish someone would take initiative to sell/resell a line of camera hardware with openipc or other open firmware on them. It's a business opportunity sorely missing with nothing to offer home/business users ip cameras with open sterile and guaranteed secure firmware vs. random pure Chinese jank.

Manufacturers could do it themselves, but the license prohibits commercial use.

View on HN

> OpenIPC source code is released under one of the most simple open source license agreements, MIT License, giving users express permission to reuse code for any purpose, even as part of a proprietary software. We only ask you politely to contribute your improvements back to us. We would be grateful for any feedback and suggestions.

Edit: since people are arguing with me, the text I quoted is right of the main page for OpenIPC, and everything here is MIT licensed too: https://github.com/OpenIPC

Except they're not releasing the source of the core parts. They say (or at least very heavily imply they are), but they aren't. See other comments.

> Majestic code while is not open, provides unprecedented performance and capabilities for a wide range of hardware. The author of Majestic streamer is looking into possibilities to open-source the codebase after he secures enough funds to support further open development. You can help to make it happen sooner.

Source: https://openipc.org/

I can't find that text anywhere on the page (the word "Majestic" literally doesn't appear anywhere).

It's right before the "Why OpenIPC Firmware?" headline.

That comes after this:

> OpenIPC Firmware uses Buildroot to build its Linux distro, and utilizes either Majestic, Mini or Venc streamer.

Which makes it sound like Majestic isn't required? Or is it the only good option, or something?

I checked the repos for those alternatives. They state that they are not as feature-complete, nor as widely supported, as Majestic is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com