On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On
Yeah, this is really pretty difficult stuff. The lgpl is probably the
least understood and most complicated free software licenses.
Chris
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On
On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:34:08 +0200, Chris DiBona cdib...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, this is really pretty difficult stuff. The lgpl is probably the
least understood and most complicated free software licenses.
Thanks for taking the time to explain it!
--
Anne van Kesteren
I mostly wanted to explain our position on the use of the library and
the LGPLs. Danny keeps it all straight for us.
Happy hacking, everyone!
Chris
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2009 09:34:08 +0200, Chris DiBona cdib...@gmail.com
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
Looping in Danny (in transit)
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon
foolist...@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
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Chris DiBona cdib...@gmail.com wrote:
Looping in Danny (in transit)
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon
foolist...@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,
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Chris DiBona cdib...@gmail.com wrote:
Looping in Danny (in transit)
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Geoffrey Sneddon
foolist...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 2 Jun 2009, at 02:58, Chris DiBona
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
[snip]
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
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 8:20 PM, Chris DiBona cdib...@gmail.com wrote:
Looping in Danny (in transit)
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Geoffrey
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
[snip]
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
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
[snip]
I would, however, get in trouble for not having paid patent
fees for
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
[snip]
I would, however, get in trouble for not having paid patent
fees for
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:50 PM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Daniel Berlin dan...@google.com wrote:
I'd like to address some questions that have been raised about the use
of FFmpeg in Chromium and Chrome as well as H.264 decoding in Chrome
(Google's distribution of Chromium). The use of FFmpeg in Chromium and
Chrome is fully compliant with the obligations of the associated
licenses. It feels a
15 matches
Mail list logo
