Re: [Off-topic] Licenses (Was: How to reratify the DFSG ?)
On Mon, Jun 01, 1998 at 11:08:05AM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> Q.E.D. The ``distributed under the GPL'' clause of the Qt licence is invalid.
Your description of the situation is correct up to this point.
> I don't know how this works in the USA, but IIRC in the UK a contract with an
> invalid clause is deemed invalid as a whole. If this is the case, Qt does not
> in fact have a licence for use as freeware, so either you're no allowed to use
> it at all, or you can do what the hell you like with it --- I leave the
> decision to you and your lawyers.
Most copyrights have a note that states, if a clause is invalid under a
certain jurisdication, all other parts of the license remain intact.
The question: "What says the court" is most important here, but
unfortunately we don't have a case. But the court will make its decision
based on common sense, and so we have to expect surprises (like the case in
germany, where CompuServe chief got two years and 100.000 DM penalty for
making pornographical material available to kids over the internet).
> I won't be touching it in a hurry though.
A good advise.
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org