[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: [freeqt] Re: FreeQt concerns
From:       Roberto Alsina <ralsina () unl ! edu ! ar>
Date:       1998-04-06 12:37:51
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, 5 Apr 1998, Alan Cox wrote:

> > > if you doubt me. The Qt library is not as free or freer than the GPL nor
> > > is it shipped with the base OS product from Mr Linus Torvalds as you may
> > > verify by inspection of his tar files.
> > 
> > Mr Torvalds doesn't distribute OSs, he distributes kernels. I thought the 
> > FSF said that themselves.
> 
> He distributes the base product. Take that to a lawyer too if you don't
> believe me.

How can I build anything with the base product he distributes?
The GPL says Qt needs to be a part of one of the components

"normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major
components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on which
the executable runs"

If I buy an OS, and it includes Qt, it fits there obviously. I don't buy 
my OSs from Linus.

It doesn't say it has to be part of any "base product", but part of the 
OS as it is distributed, or of one of the "major components". The 
ambiguity is that that list of major components is not specified, so what 
is or isn't one is open to interpretation.

> > Qt is part of "one of the main components" referred to in the GPL, 
> 
> Not unless Linus ships it. I've actually bothered to pursue these questions
> to their full extent.

Well, I have asked a few lawyers myself, as I said (only unoficially, I 
can't pay for official legal advice). 

The problem is that law is different in the US, the Uk, and here, and some
lawyers are better than others (well, even a lawyer has to be better than
something ;-). 

> > If you refuse to let KDE link to Qt on the license incompatibility basis, 
> > you are forbidding ports of emacs to windows, since KDE'fying a program 
> 
> No the windows library api's and libraries are provided with the base
> product from Microsoft Inc, Redmond (check a win95 CD)

Nope. Not the include files, which are needed to compile things.
Not the compiler, which is needed to compile things.
(Does 95 come with a linker? I think DOS did)

> > I have a dozen more ;-)
> 
> If you want a screwy one see Motif and GPL and which platforms do you have.
> Thankfully Lesstif has cleaned that rather bizarre question up.

Oh, I have pursued that one in usenet before, I just grew tired of it 
and started looking for more creative ones ;-)
And actually lesstif hasn't cleared it. If the FSF said it was ok before 
Motif existed, their opinion doesn't disappear.

> > So, Alan, I respect you a lot, but it's not so "it can't be done, full stop".
> > I have asked a few lawyer friends, and most think the language of the GPL 
> > is way too vague, and it would be just a decision for the judge.
> 
> The GPL is quite precise in most areas.
> 
> Anyway regardless of that the point Im trying to make that a freeqt is good
> for KDE stands.

That I agree with.

 ("\''/").__..-''"`-. .         Roberto Alsina
 `9_ 9  )   `-. (    ).`-._.`)  ralsina@unl.edu.ar
 (_Y_.)' ._   ) `._`.  " -.-'   Centro de Telematica
  _..`-'_..-_/ /-'_.'           Universidad Nacional del Litoral
(l)-'' ((i).' ((!.'             Santa Fe - Argentina
                                KDE Developer (MFCH)
"I can attempt anything, specialization is for insects" (50% Heinlein).

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]