[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Dynamic plugins loading

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Sat Nov 6 22:46:43 CET 2010

On Sat, Nov 06, 2010 at 11:37:35AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Jason Garrett-Glaser
> <darkshikari at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 3:53 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf <jb at videolan.org> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 11:40:34PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote :
> >>> No. It's their own specific circumstances that allows them to use
> >>> FFmpeg. Fedora has taken a stance against software that can be patent
> >>> encumbered. Neither Ubuntu, Google, and VLC have any philosophical
> >>> issues with patented codecs, so they can use FFmpeg just fine.
> >> How can Fedora run at all when menus, double-click and most part of UIs
> >> are patented?
> >
> > Freetards are only against "patented software" when it serves their
> > agenda. ?When someone points out that their software violates patents,
> > those cases don't matter. ?It's only when software they don't like
> > violates patents that they oppose it.
> H.264 is clearly owned by MPEG LA who claims to have the patents. You

H.264 is not owned by the MPEG-LA, you are about as close to the truth as
you are to the next quasar.
MPEG-LA sells patent licenses for patents owned by large companies, patents
which are claimed to cover parts of h264. So MPEG-LA does not even own the
patents nor could one say the patent owners own H.264.

> distribute FFmpeg as-is without paying them, you risk being sued by
> them.

You are quite seperated from reality.
If one uses ffmpeg for commercial purposes and distributes binaries in a
country where software patents are valid then that company might end up
being contacted by MPEG-LA and if they refuse to pay license fees they might
eventually be sued by the patent owners (not MPEG-LA). Thats a long chain of
ifs and at the end it may very well be that the patent owners loose the lawsuit.

of course someone could sue before asking, could sue non commercial people and
sue in countries where there is no legal basis for that. Similarly SCO can sue
you for distributing linux, or your neighbor can try to sue you for wearing a
green shirt and red tie (injury to his eyes).

all AFAIK and IANAL, but i know you know less and are even less a lawyer
and i think you should for your own legal saftey refrain from pretending to
have a clue about legal things otherwise someone who follows your (wrong)
advices might end up suing you for lost business.

Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and
there is nothing more to fear from them, then he is always stirring up
some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader. -- Plato
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20101106/f0724d09/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list