[whatwg] Google's use of FFmpeg in Chromium and Chrome
cdibona at gmail.com
Tue Jun 2 00:50:55 PDT 2009
Looping in Dannyb (who may not be on the list, so if necessary, I'll
forward) as I'm in the midst of a conference and can't give this the
attention it deserves.
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Håkon Wium Lie <howcome at opera.com> wrote:
> Also sprach Chris DiBona:
> > To be clear, there are two situations here:
> > Situation 1:
> > (a) Party A gives Party B a library licensed under the LGPL 2.1 along
> > with a patent license which says only Party B has the right to use it
> > (b) Party B wants to distribute the library to others
> > That's the situation the example in the LGPL 2.1 text is talking about
> > and would likely be a violation.
> > Situation 2:
> > (a) Party A gives Party B a library licensed under the LGPL 2.1
> > (b) Party B gets a patent license from Party C
> > (c) Party B then distribute the library under the LGPL 2.1
> > This situation is *not* prohibited by the LGPL 2.1 (see the LGPL 3.0
> > for a license that does deal with this situation). Under the LGPL
> > 2.1, the fact that Party B may have a patent license with an unrelated
> > third-party is irrelevant as long as it doesn't prevent Party B from
> > granting people the rights LGPL 2.1 requires they grant them (namely,
> > only those rights it in fact received from Party A).
> Thanks for your willingness to discuss these matters.
> So, to be clear, you're saying that situation 2 applies in your case?
> Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª
> howcome at opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome
Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com
Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com
More information about the whatwg