Am June 17, 2021 6:48:07 AM UTC schrieb Tino Pyssysalo :
>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"
>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
No need to go with commercial license when doing commercial product...
--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
