On Wednesday 31 Dec 2008 1:46:07 pm Praveen A wrote:
this is a joke. If I modify or enhance QT - then they can compel me to contribute such modifications to the community. But how can they compel me to release software written using QT? and further compel me to release it under the GPL only??
They don't compel you to use QT. They want _you_ to give the same respect you got from them to your users. If you don't like GPL don't use it. It is same for every GPLed software including the linux kernel. So how QT is different here?
as far as I know, QT is some sort of toolkit which is used to build applications (I may be wrong). The question is: when I build an application using QT, am I modifying QT? Am I creating a derivative work of QT? If so, I have to release the code under GPL. If not why should I release it under GPL? Next some one will say that all code created using GNU C compiler has to be released under GPL. Or if I use the linux develop software I have to release the software under GPL???
"The Open Source Edition is freely available for the development of Open Source software governed by the GNU General Public License versions 2 and 3 ("GPL")."
apparently this means that QT itself is not released under the GPL - the open source edition is released to 'develop open source software governed by the GPL ...'
That is the property of a copyleft license. There is nothing new Nokia has done here.
Nokia? how did nokia come into the picture?
So I cannot use that to develop software I release under, say, BSD license!. So what license is QT released under?
It is because GPL requires all derivative works to use the same license. Nothing new Nokia invented.
so any application developed using QT is a derivative work? And again, where does Nokia come in?