[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: new mplayer 1.0pre7try2 package

On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 03:15:46PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> And to reiterate:
> If Debian wants to be legally safe w.r.t. mpeg encoder patents, removing some 
> mpeg encoders and not others -- when the others have been pointed out -- is 
> really a bad idea.

Nathanael, stop trying to make decisions on inadequate information and
pressuring others into adopting them.

> They should all be removed until the issue is settled one 
> way or another.  I see no way that leaving some in while excluding others for 
> patent reasons is going to help Debian; if anything it can only make Debian's 
> legal situation worse, because it can be used as evidence that Debian knew 
> about the problems but left the patent-covered code in Debian. Which gets 
> you the extra penalties for "wilful" infringement.

mplayer has had an explicit warning from upstream that it's patented; ffmpeg
has an explicit document in its packaging indiciating it's okay. If you want
to get /actual legal advice/ for us, that would be great.

> Is there an objection, or shall I file a serious bug against ffmpeg?

If you have actual information on why ffmpeg shouldn't be in main that's
great. If you're just playing the "ffmpeg and mplayer should be treated
the same, but I don't know how they should be treated" game, leave it


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: