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

List:       kde-licensing
Subject:    Re: QT Designer _NOT_ under QPL.
From:       mosfet <mosfet () mandrakesoft ! com>
Date:       2000-08-18 20:29:02
[Download RAW message or body]

Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> 
> mosfet wrote:
> 
> > Oh, a last message before I unsubscribe :)
> >
> > Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> > > Right.  Who am I to talk about Troll Tech's relationship with RMS.
> > > All I did was point out two very public positions that Troll are
> > > taking that are likely to be against RMS' position.
> >
> > RMS never said it was wrong. That is Debian. RMS != Debian. Repeat 5
> > times. Rinse.
> >
> > RMS said it that although there is no need to include exceptions in apps
> > that link to Qt it may be a good idea just to make sure all the code is
> > original and belongs to the application author. Here we are talking
> > about an app written entirely by TrollTech and Debian. Debian is so
> > pedantic and closed minded they can't see the difference. I doubt RMS
> > is.
> 
> Troll is spreading confusion about the GPl/Qt licensing issue by
> doing this and you know it.
> 

Troll is perfectly within bounds by using an unmodified GPL and you know
it. Despite your personal feelings there is nothing wrong at all with
what they are doing. Asking a company to use a modified license to link
to their own software without any legal basis is arrogant, Debian
dropping the app because of it is insane.

It just goes to show Debian is using speculation and personal opinion
about Troll Tech's intent (without actually knowing anyone in the
company) instead of legal backing to make their decisions about what to
carry and what not. Great policy, there.


> > Plus, do you think that what RMS likes and dislikes affects if he wants
> > to fix the GPL so it can be legally binding in libraries? I certainly
> > hope not. If he is then were all in trouble.
> 
> I'm sure he's above it too.  I was simply saying it's not to
> going help Troll establish a collaboration with him by doing
> this.

Your not in a position to say this either way.

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