Re: Debian Free Software (FSF) or Open Source? (was Re; non-cd...)
On 28 Jun 1998 16:40:10 -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Steve> I didn't mean just some joe blow at Trolltech, I meant one of
> Steve> the two(?) people who founded it. They made the license,
> Steve> they know the intent, they are the ones that would pursue it
> Steve> and if they say it is ok, on record, that, too, is a binding
> Steve> contact.
> Are you sure it is a binding contract? Shall it be a binding
> contract for, say, CompUSA? Shall it be a binding contract with the
> end user? In other words, can a letter from them make null and void
> the licence, which seems to say other wise?
It does? Read my post where I wuoted their FAQ as saying that
distributing statically or dynamically linked binaries is ok. They seem to
think otherwise.
Now, even if that weren't the case, the question is simple, "Is this
allowed by your license?" Not a special case, a clear cut case. Is it or is
it not. If it is then it is for *ALL* people. If it isn't then it is not,
for *ALL* people.
Where is the harm in asking?
> As to whether it is pursued or not, I prefer not to have
> Debian violate licences, just becuse "oh, they say they won't sue."
In this case, placing KDE in the distribution and on the FTP site (which
is where this branch of the thread originated from) is not violating the
license. Took me 2-3 minutes at Trolltech's web page to confirm that.
Meanwhile it looks like several people on here are spreading FUD about it.
> If really there intent is other than what their licence
> states, they should change the licence.
Manoj, have you read the license? I have, just now. There license
doesn't state ANY restrictions about distribution of programs that are
staticly or dynamicly linked. In fact, the only point it makes about it is
this:
You may use this version of the Qt Free Edition to compile, link and run
application programs legally developed by third parties.
Tell me, what document are you reading of theirs that states that
distributing staticly or dynamicly linked binaries is against their license?
According to the license it is not. According to the FAQ is it not. I'd
like a cite, please.
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus | employer's. They hired me for my
ICQ: 5107343 | skills and labor, not my opinions!
---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: