The EDU license is targeted at instructor-led classroom teaching rather than scientific research work. In the latter case, open-source license is working better or even commercial one, if the work will result to a commercial product. -- Tino
> On 16.6.2021, 23.33, "Interest on behalf of Bernhard Lindner" <interest-boun...@qt-project.org on behalf of priv...@bernhard-lindner.de> wrote: > > Never heard about that license. I was very interested until I read the > FAQ: > > "Under the educational license, limitations apply. Applications and/or > devices may not be > distributed to third parties and must be used for internal use only. > Subcontracting in any > direction is not allowed under this license. Professional support of Qt > is not included > either." > > This means that as soon as the students use the software in the practical > part of their > studies and have to publish the software as part of their scientific work > or as part of > their degree, they are forced to go back to the OSS license. That's > ridiculous. For me, > that means avoiding Qt altogether in our curriculum or, if at all, > relying exclusively on > the OSS license. > It seems like there is an internal company rule that requires all license > terms to be > written in such a way that licensees are annoyed under all circumstances. _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
