From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 29 14:47:35 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E06216A41C for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:47:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from pi.codefab.com (pi.codefab.com [199.103.21.227]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6880F43D49 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:47:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from cswiger@mac.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pi.codefab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 945185D41; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:47:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pi.codefab.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (pi.codefab.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32803-04; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:47:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-68-161-54-113.ny325.east.verizon.net [68.161.54.113]) by pi.codefab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1635C44; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:47:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <42C2B47D.7050302@mac.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:47:25 -0400 From: Chuck Swiger Organization: The Courts of Chaos User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Danny Pansters References: <200506291330.56499.danny@ricin.com> In-Reply-To: <200506291330.56499.danny@ricin.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at codefab.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [FYI] QT4 licensing looks very bad for *BSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 14:47:35 -0000 Danny Pansters wrote: > I don't want to scare anyone but today QT4 was released and their web page > > (http://www.trolltech.com/download/opensource.html) > > specifically states several times that if using the free version one is > required to release their own code under GPL. That's effectively a > requirement to relicense which goes much further than the GPL itself. The > former licensing amounted to "abide to the GPL or QPL" as is normal for a GPL > project and in that case one could release code under BSDL and if anything > let the next guy worry about it (if they want to distribute a derivative). TrollTech is playing the same type of game that MySQL is doing. If you write your own program, and use it with QT which results in a derivative work, then you may not redistribute your program without complying with the terms of the GPL. Nothing in the GPL requires someone else's code to be relicensed under the GPL, it just requires that code to be under a GPL-miscable license. The "new" BSDL (ie, without the advertizing clause) is fine. Also note that the Open Source Definition does not allow restrictions on the field of endeavor: "The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research. Rationale: The major intention of this clause is to prohibit license traps that prevent open source from being used commercially. We want commercial users to join our community, not feel excluded from it." -- -Chuck