W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2009

[whatwg] Google's use of FFmpeg in Chromium and Chrome

From: Daniel Berlin <dannyb@google.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 21:03:57 -0400
Message-ID: <2fbe2a060906061803o6f3955ddl3e9c6c97d77d977@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Daniel Berlin<dannyb at google.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 7:52 PM, H?kon Wium Lie<howcome at opera.com> wrote:
>
>> This if statement seems to be true, and I therefore still don't
>> understand your reasoning.
>
> I've explained my position and reasoning, and we are going to have to
> agree to disagree, because it's clear neither of us are going to
> accept the other's viewpoint.
>
> My understanding of the example is consistent with the LGPL's goal
> statement at the start: "Therefore, we insist that any patent license
> obtained for a version of the library must be consistent with the full
> freedom of use specified in this license."
> The goal statement, at least to me, makes clear the example is talking
> about obtaining a patent license that covers the library directly, not
> that covers something that uses the library.

Missed a sentence somehow.

My understanding of the example is also consistent with the actual
legal clause in front of the example, and I use it to inform my
position on the example.  Taking a example from a paragraph out of the
surrounding context and trying to claim it stands alone seems a bit
strange to me, but i'm just a simple engilawyer.
Received on Saturday, 6 June 2009 18:03:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:13 UTC