Re: Status of KDE/Qt - interim decision

[Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com>]

Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:
> Are you sure? I think it is okay to have the KDE sources on the ftp site.
> 
> Mmmh. Please quote the relevant part. I can imagine that some part of the
> GPL could be interpreted this way.

     2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
   of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and
   distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1
   above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:
   ...
       b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
       whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
       part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
       parties under the terms of this License.
   ...
   These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole.  If
   identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program,
   and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
   themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
   sections when you distribute them as separate works.  But when you
   distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based
   on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of
   this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the
   entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
   
   Thus, it is not the intent of this section to claim rights or contest
   your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent is to
   exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or
   collective works based on the Program.

Note that I've filed bug reports (or added information to an existing
bug report) for every case I had found where some kde person had taken
a non-kde GPL'd work and modified it so that it requires Qt.

-- 
Raul