[email protected] wrote .. > Lets be patient, this is only draft. Exactly, and beware the FUD. What's being discussed here are patents, which is a different issue from copyright. The way copyright restricts you, via copyright law and the software license, is completely different from the way patents restrict you via patent law.
So this doesn't affect the software license in any way. libvpx has been -- and will continue -- to be free software. Even if people don't get any benefit at all from this patent cross-licensing deal (which seems unlikely), so what? There are many free software programs out there like that already so this is nothing new. The patent system is so broken today that everyone is *already* at risk of someone walking up to them and pointing a patent gun at their head. That's nothing new. At least Google's trying to help, at least to the extent that it's possible in the broken patent system. The *real* problem is that software is considered to be eligible for patents. The focus should be on that problem: Eliminating software from the list of patent-eligible things. That's one of the FSF's campaigns: https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/
