[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] G722 decoder
Wed Mar 25 18:31:33 CET 2009
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:25:26AM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> On 3/25/2009 10:11 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:58:50AM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> >> On 3/25/2009 9:43 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >>> Maybe you could be kind enough to explain how *any* program can be
> >>> distributed as LGPL v2.1+ in your view. It seems to be plain
> >>> impossible from what you write.
> >> Well:
> >> [...]
> > Answer my question.
> >> But "as is" ffmpeg.c without modifications cannot be considered a "Library"
> > Sure, but the LGPL can be applied to programs that are not libraries.
> > The wording of the LGPL becomes a bit awkward in this case.
> Yes and, according to the license, it becomes awkward and then weak.
> Legal terms are usually not mean to be weak like this.
You will hear with dismay that the wording in v3 is improved.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel