From kde-licensing  Wed Apr 15 16:13:35 1998
From: Matthew Asplund <matt () xenon ! cchem ! berkeley ! edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 16:13:35 +0000
To: kde-licensing
Subject: Re: [freeqt] Re: FreeQt concerns
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-licensing&m=89265683205555


On Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Richard Stallman wrote:

> After reading the distribution terms for "FreeQT", I can see that they
> are the same as formerly used for Qt.  In other words, "FreeQT" is a
> misleading name: it is not free software.
> 
> The main problem is in this restriction:
> 
>        Nobody but Troll Tech ( the makers of QT ) are allowed to distribute
>       modified versions ( they will and incorporate modifications however )
> 
> This restriction means that "FreeQT" is not free software, because the
> freedom to distribute a modified version is a crucial aspect of what
> free software means.  As a result, linking "FreeQt" with GPL-covered
> programs violates the GNU GPL.
> 
Maybe this has been said before, but I will say it again.  RMS's arguments
are unchanged if we substitute Motif for Qt.  I can get the Motif sources,
and change them, but I cannot redistribute them.  In spite of this there
is plenty of Motif GPL software out there.  I think of Qt as being the
same class of software as Motif and therefore a perfect replacement for
what Motif does on other UNIX desktops.   Is RMS willing to say that no
GPL code can be linked with Motif?  Now that TOG has changed the X11
licensing, is he willing to say that no GPL code can be linked to X11R6.5
(or whatever the next version is?)

Matthew Asplund
matt@xenon.cchem.berkeley.edu