[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] G722 decoder

Måns Rullgård mans
Wed Mar 25 20:00:41 CET 2009

Baptiste Coudurier <baptiste.coudurier at gmail.com> writes:

> On 3/25/2009 11:42 AM, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> Baptiste Coudurier <baptiste.coudurier at gmail.com> writes:
>>> On 3/25/2009 10:25 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:21:03AM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>>>>> On 3/25/2009 10:14 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:06:16AM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>>>>>>> But IMHO when you install a program using the GPL or LGPL, you accept a
>>>>>>> specific version of the license, which is displayed, and not the "or
>>>>>>> later" clause unless specified by other means.
>>>>>> How is the acceptance of licenses during installation in any way related
>>>>>> to the topic at hand?
>>>>> No the fact that what is presented to you is a fixed version license
>>>>> plays a very important part of the topic.
>>>> Well thank goodness that FFmpeg has neither an instlaller nor displays a
>>>> license then.
>>> However, in our case, the COPYING.LGPL is the reference, and is still
>>> using a fixed version.
>> The contents of the COPYING.LGPL file alone is completely irrelevant
>> to the licensing terms of any particular source file.  It only applies
>> because the source file explicitly say so in their header.  The header
>> used in most of the FFmpeg source files states that *the file it is
>> part of* is distributed under the terms of COPYING.LGPL or a later
>> version of the LGPL.  The situation is entirely equivalent to pasting
>> COPYING.LGPL into all the files, then deleting COPYING.LGPL.  The
>> reason we keep COPYING.LGPL the way we do is purely to save some space
>> in the source files.
> Yes, that is true, however I believe this is different when distributing.

What makes you believe that?  Note that the (L)GPL *only* applies when
distributing.  You may do anything you please in your own bedroom.

M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list