Joshua J. Kugler
joshua at eeinternet.com
Tue Jun 10 17:53:09 CEST 2008
On Tuesday 10 June 2008, AR said something like:
> maillistaddress at paulbanks.org wrote:
> > I've been following some of the commentary on this for a while now
> > but I've not seen mention of the entity who is offering software on
> > these terms. It sounds to me a bit like the blurb surrounding
> > Trolltechs QT licence where you have to pick at the outset whether
> > it's a commercial project or not. (Although I was unable to locate
> > the actual text of the commercial license.)
> Paulbanks gets the prize. :-) As I said before, I didn't mention
> the name of the licensor to avoid smearing, and I believe there is
> enough good discussion here that has avoided that.
> If you install Ubuntu 7.10, you get installations of qt3 and qt4.
> For both of those, there is this file:
> Both of these refer to /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL or
> /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2 which are identical files.
> Nowhere within the distribution is there any mention, that I can
> find, that by agreeing to this license I can no longer obtain a
> proprietary license. But paulbanks quotes their website below.
> > They write, "Trolltech's commercial license terms do not allow you
> > to start developing proprietary software using the Open Source
> > edition."
I believe if you dig around enough, you'll also find a FAQ that says to
the effect: "What if I started developing with the GPL2 version and now
wish to sell my product commercially?" The answer, effectively,
is "Call us, we'll talk."
Part-Time System Admin/Programmer
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu/ ID 0xDB26D7CE
More information about the legal