Re: Qt license okay?
Gregor Hoffleit wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 1999 at 10:59:54AM -0600, John Hasler wrote:
> > Peter S Galbraith writes:
> > > That is surprising. Should I lobby Qt about changing the license
> > > on the license?
> > Why don't you just email them and ask permission?
> The point of keeping the license document under restrictive copyright
> is certainly this: Imagine somebody took the GPL document, changed
> some of its terms, and used this polluted GPL in a project under the
> name GPL.
> I guess Troll will certainly permit you to use the terms of their
> license, as long as you don't call it QPL.
I sent the following to troll 3 days ago and have not heard back
| A friend wants to make his software (which is unrelated to Qt)
| open-source for inclusion in Debian GNU/Linux, but wants some
| protection in case he ever decides to sell a derived-work version
| (inclusion of submitted patches). I suggested that he use the
| QPL as a template license, changing the license name, the
| software name, and putting his own name instead of Troll Tech.
| He'd also remove any clause that refer to being a library, since
| his software is not a library.
| We just realized that the QPL says:
| THE Q PUBLIC LICENSE version 0.92
| Copyright (C) 1998 Troll Tech AS, Norway.
| Everyone is permitted to copy and
| distribute this license document
| We're allowed to copy it and distribute it, but we'd like
| permission to modify it to form a license for other software.
| Would you grant this permission? Would you consider changing the
| notice on the QPL to allow anyone to modify it as long as they
| changed the name of the license (to avoid confusion; you don't
| want multiple versions of QPL licences!)