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

Re: mplayer, the time has come

MJ Ray told me I never properly answered this question; sorry. Here is my answer

Glenn Maynard wrote:

On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:08:42PM +0100, Sebastien NOEL wrote:
*   You removed libmpdvdkit2/ because US laws suck.
   Why don't you remove also libfaad2/ which is full of patents problems ?
   (according to /usr/share/doc/ffmpeg/patents.txt.gz)

I hope that isn't a file with descriptions of patents--anyone who reads
such a thing would risk increased patent liability.  I'd rather not look
for myself to find out, though.

That said, are the patents supposedly affecting libfaad2 actively being
enforced?  Debian's general policy on software patents is to ignore ones
which aren't, since that's the only policy that allows anyone to do
anything at all.

two answers

1) libfaad2/ in mplayer is almost identical to src/libfaad that is in xine-lib

2) yes, it seems (according to /usr/share/doc/ffmpeg/patents.txt.gz ) that in 2000 Dolby threatened the author of FAAC ( that contains libfaad), and he had to remove the binaries
 he was shipping from  faac.sf.net. Since then, AFAICT nothing happened

Since many distributions have been distributing xine and mplayer with libfaad inside, I guess
that the problem is not relevant

If somebody thinks otherwise, we should correct xine immediatly (before Sarge is released); or otherwise somebody should explain me what is difference between xine and mplayer usage
of FAAC code.


Reply to: