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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: New QPL online
From:       Richard Stallman <rms () gnu ! org>
Date:       1999-03-07 16:25:24
[Download RAW message or body]

    I do not fully understand why 6c is a problem to people writing software
    for the KDE. As soon as they release their software "to the general
    public" 6c cannot apply and they therefore satisfy the QPL if they license 
    their code under the GPL.

The scenario where the issue arises is this:

Suppose A writes program P and releases it under the GPL plus the
special exception of "permission to link with Qt".  Then B downloads P
and has permission to use it under the terms of the GNU GPL.  This
includes permission to make and run a modified version P' without ever
releasing it.

When B links P' with Qt, the Qt conditions say he cannot do what the
terms for P say he can do.  In other words, the QPL requirements
contradict the permissions given for P by releasing it under the GPL.

The reason why I designed the GPL to permit people to make and run
their own private modified versions is to respect privacy.  It is
unacceptably intrusive to force people to publish all their modified
versions.  Perhaps there are some special cases where such a
requirement would be legitimate, but to apply it across the board is
surely wrong.


There also seems to be a contradiction between 6a and the GPL:

    a. You must ensure that all recipients of machine-executable forms of
    these items are also able to receive and use the complete
    machine-readable source code to the items without any charge
    beyond the costs of data transfer.

This is similar in spirit to a requirement in the GPL, but it sets a
stricter limit on the fee, and thus takes away some of the permission
that the GPL gives.

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