Re: MPEG in general Was: Is anyone packaging `lame' ?
Chris Cheney <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 11:55:30PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> * Chris Cheney
>> | Its all encumbered, there is a separate organization MPEG-LA that
>> | strictly deals with the licensing. It is quite surprising to me that
>> | ffmpeg was allowed into main.
>> According to rumors I heard, it was allowed in since other
>> applications (xine at least, I think) already included it. So it
>> didn't really make a difference -- if we're infringing on patents with
>> ffmpeg, we are with xine as well.
>> (Apologies if xine is not the package I'm thinking about.)
> Wouldn't that be an argument to have xine removed from Debian not the
> addition of ffmpeg?
ffmpeg is already in Debian :