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

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    Re: Licensing (Was: [kde-promo] What's the community up to?)
From:       Eva Brucherseifer <eva.brucherseifer () basyskom ! de>
Date:       2004-12-07 16:16:08
Message-ID: 200412071716.09430.eva.brucherseifer () basyskom ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Dienstag, 7. Dezember 2004 15:52 schrieb Waldo Bastian:
> On Tuesday 07 December 2004 14:59, Eva Brucherseifer wrote:
> > I've thought a lot about this licensing issue on Windows. Esp. since all
> > GPL apps on Windows of course also link to propriatory software: the
> > system libraries. So where is the border? Which libraries are allowed to
> > link to, which are not allowed? AFAIK all libraries which are delivered
> > with the system are allowed. What do others think about this?
> 
> That issue was raised today on kde-core-devel, see my reply below:
> (kbabel: example of application, msvcrt: example of Windows system library)
> 
> The boundary is defined by the GPL, clause 3
> "However, as a special exception, the source code distributed need not
> include anything that is 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, unless that component itself
> accompanies the executable."
> 
> So in order to be able to link to a commercial Qt, that commercial Qt
> version should normally be distributed along with one of the major
> components and not along with the executable (kbabel)
> 
> I think (but I could be wrong) that the difference here is that msvcrt is
> normally distributed along with the Visual C++ compiler, and that Qt is
> normally not distributed along with the compiler or any other major part of
> the operating systme and that as such, you are not allowed to link to a
> commercial Qt while you are allowed to link to msvcrt on the windows
> platform.

Can you follow my arguments, if I say, that if there were a binary-only 
version of the Qt/Win-library (without headers and tools) for free download 
and use, than it would be ok to link GPL software?

And BTW, the Qt library is distributed along the designer which is like a 
compiler. Is this similar to the msvcrt example?

Or would we run into another FSF-doesn't-like-us nightmare, which is of course 
something we don't want?

Greetings,
eva


> 
> Personal opinion only, not a laywer, no legal advice, yada yada yada.
> 
> Cheers,
> Waldo
 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on \
or temporarily stop your subscription.


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