[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Qt license change

Someone copied me on this thread. Note that I do not get debian-devel.

The GPL does not allow distribution of _proprietary_ applications using
GPL-ed facilities. It does allow free software to be sold.

This license is not much different from having GPL-ed headers.



On Wed, Nov 18, 1998 at 11:48:26AM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:

> > > The QPL requires a commercial license for proprietary apps..
> > > The GPL does not allow commercial apps but doesn't offer other licensing.
> > 
> > What???  GPL most certainly DOES allow commercial apps.  www.fsf.org even
> > has an article on selling GPL software!
> If the code is proprietary (which is what I meant above) QPL says you need a

I still don't follow.  What does this have to do with the issue? 
Proprietary code is, by definition, not open source.  We all agree that's
bad.  What's the point?

Incidentally, the GPL quite clearly spells out that you must distribute your

> commercial license.  If it's proprietary the GPL says you can't distribute
> it at all.  (The fact is that you can't under the GPL, but you can get other
> licensing from the copyright holders..)  The QPL simply spells it out while
> the GPL does not.
> -- 
> Show me the code or get out of my way.

John Goerzen   Linux, Unix consulting & programming   jgoerzen@complete.org |
Developer, Debian GNU/Linux (Free powerful OS upgrade)       www.debian.org |
Visit the Air Capital Linux Users Group on the web at http://www.aclug.org

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

The U.S. does _not_ have a budget surplus. The $70 Billion "surplus" hardly
offsets the $5 Trillion national debt.
Bruce Perens K6BP bruce@pixar.com 510-620-3502 NCI-1001

Reply to: