On 9 Nov 2008 14:40:22 GMT, Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ben Finney wrote: > >>> It is a novel interpretation of the GPL. Qt Software have every >>> right to impose this sort of condition, but it makes me want to >>> avoid them. >> >> No, they have no such right to interpret the GPL this way; it would be >> entirely incompatible with the GPL since it would be an imposition of >> additional restrictions, resulting in work that could not legally be >> redistributed at all. > > Thay aren't claiming that Qt itself is governed by the GPL, what they > are claiming is that the 'Qt Open Source License' permits you to use it > for development of "Open Source software governed by the GNU General > Public License versions 2 and 3". I believe they can make whatever > conditions they like for their own license.
This is just plain wrong. The open source version is licensed under either v2 or v3 of the GPL - your choice. There is no such thing as a separate "Qt Open Source License". > The GPL doesn't actually say you cannot redistribute work which adds > additional restrictions. It says "If the Program as you > received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is > governed by this License along with a term that is a further > restriction, you may remove that term." > >> In fact, I don't think they are making such an interpretation, though >> their poorly-worded web page that you quoted certainly encourages >> readers to make such a false interpretation. > > It looks very much to me as though they are trying to make > that interpretation, it is repeated in a variety of forms across the > website. But it doesn't really matter whether they can make it stick or > not, I simply choose to avoid worrying about the issue by choosing > another platform where possible. (Which is a shame really as the small > amount of playing I did with Qt indicates it to be a very nice > platform.) > > The license itself says: ...you mean the webpage, the license is the standard GPL with all that that implies... > "This means that you cannot use a Qt Open Source Edition if your > software must be built with any modules that impose conditions on you > that contradict the conditions of the GNU GPL, including, but not > limited to, software patents, commercial license agreements, > copyrighted interface definitions or any sort of non-disclosure > agreement (NDA). In these circumstances you must use a commercial > edition of Qt." > > That I guess taken literally that means you cannot use Qt Open Source > Edition if your software uses Qt Open Source Edition. The only "additional" restrictions are those imposed by the *commercial* license. As I said before, those restrictions are intended to discourage commercial developers from avoiding paying license costs during their development phase. Phil -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list