- From: Daniel Berlin <dannyb@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 22:06:57 -0400
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1 at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Daniel Berlin <dannyb at google.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Chris DiBona <cdibona at gmail.com> wrote: >>> Looping in Danny (in transit) >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon >>> <foolistbar at googlemail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2 Jun 2009, at 02:58, Chris DiBona wrote: >>>> >>>>> One participant quoted one of the examples from the LGPL 2.1, which >>>>> says "For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free >>>>> redistribution of the Library by all those who receive copies directly >>>>> or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it >>>>> and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the >>>>> Library." >>>> >>>> I'm still unclear as to how this does not apply to Chrome's case. If I get a >>>> copy of Chrome, you are bound (by the LGPL) to provide me with a copy of the >>>> source ffmpeg, and I must be able to redistribute that in either binary or >>>> source form. >> Which you can. >> >>> ?I would, however, get in trouble for not having paid patent >>>> fees for doing so. >> No more or less trouble than you would have gotten in had you gotten >> it from ffmpeg instead of us, which combined with the fact that we do >> not restrict any of your rights under the LGPL 2.1, is the important >> part. > > Let me ask for more clarification here, since you seem to have a > really good understanding of the legal implications. > > It seems to me that if I have decided for whatever reason (probably > because I did not want to use a library that is likely to infringe on > patents) that I did not want to have ffmpeg installed on my computer, > and I installed Chrome, that in this case I would get a library > installed on my computer without being aware of it. Or turned the > other way - if I knew that Chrome comes with ffmpeg and I really > didn't want ffmpeg installed on my computer, I could not use Chrome. > Is this correct? No, it isn't. I'm told if you remove the ffmpeg dll, Chrome should still function properly, it should just not recognize <video> as a valid tag.
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 19:06:57 UTC