For Chrome to fulfill the LGPL requirements, anyone getting FFmpeg as part of Chrome must be able to extract FFmpeg and redistribute it and derivative works without being sued by MPEG-LA. This would have required Google to get a license for Chrome that also covered derivative works. This doesn't make FFmpeg's original software licensed, only copies obtained as part of Chrome, or derivatives. Also, Chrome may remove the unnecessary parts of FFmpeg (such as encoding and other decoders), and the MPEG-LA license may only cover decoding. But, this should allow the other browsers to extract the Chrome FFmpeg and use it in their browser without further licensing. If they get sued for that, then Google's license to FFmpeg terminates (on allegation of infringement, not proof). Unfortunately, only FFmpeg contributors could sue Google for that breach of LGPL, which would then make no one able to redistribute FFmpeg. Kind of a software version of don't ask/don't tell.