Re: Having a non-free and a non-cd branch?
Philip Hands wrote:
>
> Kevin Atkinson <kevina@clark.net> wrote:
> > When they say under the GPL tsurly hey only mean for program using Qt
> > and not Qt itself.
>
> The GPL applies to ALL the parts that go to make a program. The only
> exception being the default system libraries that one can guarantee to part of
> any system on which a person might want to run a program. Qt does not qualify
> for this exception (I don't have it on any of my systems ;-)
And so KDE needs to adapt a more specific licence and thise who nasty
situration would be solved. What I have been trying to say all along.
Are you getting my point.
> The idea that getting permission from Troll makes it OK is bogus.
>
> Imagine this scenario:
>
> Large international bank grabs a copy of kdebase from us (which act of
> distribution involves us granting them the right to modify ALL the source
> including Qt)
>
> They modify Qt to make it run better on the ATM's and start running it in
> every branch worldwide (using the GPL as their right to distribute)
>
> Troll Tech goes ape, and sues the bank for copyright infringement, and the
> bank points at the GPL, and says ``Debian Licenced us to modify the code,
> and use it where we like''
>
> Debian then gets sued by Troll and the Bank.
>
> Game Over!
>
> Let's drop Qt and KDE. (I'm not overly pleased about the possibility of
> getting sued for owning a Debian mirror)
Ok so Qt should remain in non-free. The KDE GPL license is in conflicts
with the Qt license. Thus KDE needs to modify there license to rectify
this situation so that it can stay in contrib.
Do you agree with me now?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: