Re: Yipes!

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: Yipes!
by Andrew on Wednesday 27/Jun/2001, @18:24

> I've been reading posts (even past my own) and
> I was wondering, is it possible to change the
> licensing for KDE and its components? It is
> ludicrous that a license designed to protect
> developers and encourage software freedom is
> causing all of us hassles.

If it's a problem, just buy a commercial QT license and then release your software as you see fit.

Unless I'm missing something it really is that simple. You want a free toolkit, be prepared to make your software noncommercial and have the source available. If you don't like these restrictions, buy the commercial license and do as you please. I mean the full-blown version is only USD$2k in onesies; if you're writing commercial software this is practically nothing considering there are zero royalties or renewals.

Related Links

·   Articles on Qt
·   Also by Andrew
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Yipes!
by Casteyde on Wednesday 27/Jun/2001, @20:02

Mmmh. I don't think he meant building comercial
apps with free librairies. I think he was simply astonished by the mess these license questions are making... simply look at this thread ! Quite complicated in fact...

However, I disagree with the GPLing librairies. FSF seems to fear someone steals code, and want to reny LGPL. However, I personnaly still consider that as restrictive, and not conform to the original goal, that was liberty. Even if it allows comercial people to use free librairies.

Free movement is not a comercial war (even if there are more and more comercial distros), it's a philosophy and a fight against intellectual and information monopoly. So why even wondering about commercial apps ?

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Yipes!
by Steve Hunt on Wednesday 27/Jun/2001, @20:11

EXACTLY!!! It is ludicrous to have open source code, when the same organization can't work with it, much less any other organization. The GPL is great for some things, such as smaller independent programs. However, I don't understand why KDE is licensed under the GPL.

I'm not sure about this, but I think the reason that KDE is under the GPL is because the FSF, or some other organization yelled at the KDE people (as a whole) and influenced them to license the whole thing under the GPL. However, for such a large and diverse project such as KDE, the GPL is not the right solution IMHO.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Yipes!
by nap on Thursday 28/Jun/2001, @08:39

It seems more like KDE guys weren't aware, how fascistic license GPL really is. See for example.

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-kde-list/1999-May/msg00024.html

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"I never sing because it upsets our dogs." -- Waldo Bastian
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.