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

Re: Qt license okay?

On Thu, Jan 14, 1999 at 02:12:44PM -0500, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> I convinced a friend to release his software under a free
> license, but he wanted protection in case he later decide to
> commercialize a version of his software.  I suggested the Qt
> license which was at version 0.92 at the time (and still is).
> Is it considered DFSG-compliant?
> He took the license, changed the software name for his and the
> company name for his name and delete whatever refered to Qt being
> a library (his software is not a library).  The result is as
> follows (can it go in main? if not, what should we change?)
>                 THE GRI PUBLIC LICENSE VERSION 0.1
>                AS APPLIED TO Gri Version 0.1
>                  Copyright (C) 1999 Dan E. Kelley.
>                      Everyone is permitted to copy and
>                      distribute this license document.

Umm, for a completely different point:

The header of the QPL is

>                 THE Q PUBLIC LICENSE version 0.92 
>             Copyright (C) 1998 Troll Tech AS, Norway. 
>                        Everyone is permitted to copy and 
>                        distribute this license document. 

They don't grant you the right to modify the text of the QPL document,
as your friend did. I'm no lawyer at all, but doesn't this mean that
your friend either has to use the verbatim QPL for his program, or he
has to came up with a similar license in his own words ? Changing the
copyright of the license document as he did seems definitely
completely illegal (btw., the GPL says "Everyone is permitted to copy
and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing
it is not allowed.").


Reply to: