Active Topics
-
Firefox with Leste (5)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 3 days, 1 hr ago -
Handbook (2)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 4 days, 1 hr ago - more...
|
2009-12-14
, 17:02
|
|
Posts: 3,841 |
Thanked: 1,079 times |
Joined on Nov 2006
|
#22
|
And if its nothing you need to keep secret, you can help modify and add to Qt for free?!
The question in the first paragraph you'll have to reformulate before it'll get through to my brain!
__________________
N800/OS2007|N900/Maemo5
-- Metalayer-crawler delenda est.
-- Current state: Fed up with everything MeeGo.
N800/OS2007|N900/Maemo5
-- Metalayer-crawler delenda est.
-- Current state: Fed up with everything MeeGo.
 |
|
2009-12-19
, 15:33
|
|
Posts: 1,589 |
Thanked: 720 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
@ Arlington (DFW), Texas
|
#23
|
How can big OSes like RIM or Android help get Qt ported for their OS? Could they use this commercial license to do that as well?
__________________
Maemo-Freak.com
"...and the Freaks shall inherit the Earth."
Maemo-Freak.com
"...and the Freaks shall inherit the Earth."
|
|
2009-12-19
, 17:14
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#24
|
Strictly speaking they don't even need commercial licenses for that (in fact, license-wise they're probably better off working under the LGPL - what's the point of them adapting Qt if they want to keep 3rd party developers out ?). With android, again, the question is what would the use of Qt be - yes, sure, they could resurrect Jambi and make a Dalvik oriented Qt binding, but that would still mean nothing with regard to cross-platform mobile development (and no, the native code interface would not help much). I'm not familiar with RIM so no clue about that. iPhoneOS, however, certainly would be doable (but would take a lot of effort because of UI paradigm differences).
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
|
|
2010-12-17
, 21:17
|
|
Posts: 1 |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
|
#25
|
I know this thread is old, but too many people seem confused about the (L)GPL license so here is my two cents...
The LGPL is really simple to use. It's a license to use libraries free of charge. The only real restriction is you can't take the source to the library add your "improvement" and then close the source and give/sell the binary of the library. Note that the library and your app are separate. The license of one doesn't effect the other. Most OS's include or have available QT libraries. Your app would normally be bundled separate from the QT libraries. You can make commercial apps with QT freely without worry about licenses. You can even change the library and re-distribute the library if you make those changes to the library (QT) open source. (just the library changes, not your whole app!)
The best part is that your changes to QT are still copyrighted by you. Nokia can not use your improvements in their commercial "version" of QT unless Nokia buys a special license from YOU. You are only required to make your improvements available as open source. You are NOT required give your improvements to Nokia so they can resell your work .
If more developers would quit signing away their copyrights (some unknowingly with a "sign here to be added to the official developer list and then we will add your patches to the main source tree"...) we wouldn't have the current problem of large companies (Nokia, Sun, Oracle, etc) taking over open source projects and turning them into commercial products. Its a very dishonest and unfortunately a very common trend lately, that large companies are taking an open source project and buying the rights to the domain/project name just so they can then sell "licenses" to dumb companies that don't know they can use the software for free.
The LGPL is really simple to use. It's a license to use libraries free of charge. The only real restriction is you can't take the source to the library add your "improvement" and then close the source and give/sell the binary of the library. Note that the library and your app are separate. The license of one doesn't effect the other. Most OS's include or have available QT libraries. Your app would normally be bundled separate from the QT libraries. You can make commercial apps with QT freely without worry about licenses. You can even change the library and re-distribute the library if you make those changes to the library (QT) open source. (just the library changes, not your whole app!)
The best part is that your changes to QT are still copyrighted by you. Nokia can not use your improvements in their commercial "version" of QT unless Nokia buys a special license from YOU. You are only required to make your improvements available as open source. You are NOT required give your improvements to Nokia so they can resell your work .
If more developers would quit signing away their copyrights (some unknowingly with a "sign here to be added to the official developer list and then we will add your patches to the main source tree"...) we wouldn't have the current problem of large companies (Nokia, Sun, Oracle, etc) taking over open source projects and turning them into commercial products. Its a very dishonest and unfortunately a very common trend lately, that large companies are taking an open source project and buying the rights to the domain/project name just so they can then sell "licenses" to dumb companies that don't know they can use the software for free.
|
|
2010-12-17
, 21:35
|
|
Posts: 1,746 |
Thanked: 2,100 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by mouse2600
You aren't required to sign over your changes, but chances are your fork (which is what you've created) will quickly be ignored or gather a bad reputation for being incompatible with the trunk and your changes will be lost eventually.
The best part is that your changes to QT are still copyrighted by you. Nokia can not use your improvements in their commercial "version" of QT unless Nokia buys a special license from YOU. You are only required to make your improvements available as open source. You are NOT required give your improvements to Nokia so they can resell your work .
If more developers would quit signing away their copyrights (some unknowingly with a "sign here to be added to the official developer list and then we will add your patches to the main source tree"...)
we wouldn't have the current problem of large companies (Nokia, Sun, Oracle, etc) taking over open source projects and turning them into commercial products.
Not like it matters. If Nokia refused to take input like XFree86 or decided to go 100% proprietary then the community could fork at the last LGPL release. But it's not in Nokia's interests to do that.
 |
|
2010-12-17
, 21:39
|
|
Posts: 1,684 |
Thanked: 1,562 times |
Joined on Jun 2008
@ Austin, TX
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by christexaport
You mean like Lighthouse?
How can big OSes like RIM or Android help get Qt ported for their OS? Could they use this commercial license to do that as well?
http://code.google.com/p/android-lighthouse/
Originally Posted by mouse2600
Trolltech (now owned by Nokia) for a long time had a business model of selling Qt for licensing and support. I personally am not picky on the point of copyright assignment. If I contributed to Qt then yes they would make money off of me but that money helps fund a lot of Qt development. The nice thing is that when a company goes sour we can fork (LibreOffice, though still a bad example seeing as how the relationship was strained long before that).
If more developers would quit signing away their copyrights (some unknowingly with a "sign here to be added to the official developer list and then we will add your patches to the main source tree"...) we wouldn't have the current problem of large companies (Nokia, Sun, Oracle, etc) taking over open source projects and turning them into commercial products. Its a very dishonest and unfortunately a very common trend lately, that large companies are taking an open source project and buying the rights to the domain/project name just so they can then sell "licenses" to dumb companies that don't know they can use the software for free.
Note that copyright assignment only affects projects under the GPL/LGPL. If I did non-ad BSD then companies could do whatever.
__________________
770, n810, n900, Ideapad S10-3t
TheOneRing, DialCentral, Gonvert, Quicknote, Multilist, ejpi, nQa, Waters of Shiloah
Programming Blog
770, n810, n900, Ideapad S10-3t
TheOneRing, DialCentral, Gonvert, Quicknote, Multilist, ejpi, nQa, Waters of Shiloah
Programming Blog
|
|
2010-12-18
, 01:17
|
|
Posts: 3,464 |
Thanked: 5,107 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
@ Gothenburg in Sweden
|
#28
|
to make it simple:
it is totally legally to make commercial apps using lgpl and QT and in the case of meego as I know it external is not allowed to change qt anyway cause of the compliance?
So I dont see why you as a app develolper need to change "libQT API" and make that code closed?
But I have too agree it is confusing.
it is totally legally to make commercial apps using lgpl and QT and in the case of meego as I know it external is not allowed to change qt anyway cause of the compliance?
So I dont see why you as a app develolper need to change "libQT API" and make that code closed?
But I have too agree it is confusing.
Originally Posted by christexaport
Glad you guys stepped in. I'm new to all this legalese, and not a developer. I do work with alot of developers, and had this question asked for a project that sounds perfect for Qt.
If I'm hearing right, as long as I'm using the standard libraries of Qt embedded into the supported platforms, it is free, but if you add new libraries or edit any of those present, and don't want to share it, it costs?
Am I getting the right idea, basically? Trying to understand this so I can explain to my collegue. Many developers are confused about this very thing, and so am I.
$3k is peanuts to keep a secret if its an expensive secret, like government stuff. Cool stuff. And if its nothing you need to keep secret, you can help modify and add to Qt for free?! That's amazing. Makes Nokia look like the biggest philanthropist on earth...
Maemo-Freak.com
"...and the Freaks shall inherit the Earth."