Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Graphics Software

Trolltech Adopts GPL 3 for Qt 240

Funkmaster F writes "At the KDE Developer Conference today, Trolltech CEO Havaard Nord announced that its Qt application development toolkit will be released under GPL 3. 'Here at the KDE release event, Nord's announcement was met with applause. Like Trolltech's initial decision to move from its own QPL license to the GPL, this announcement and the company's more recent decision to adopt the GPL for all platforms rather than just Linux, demonstrate the company's ongoing commitment to openness.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trolltech Adopts GPL 3 for Qt

Comments Filter:
  • by MichaelCrawford ( 610140 ) on Saturday January 19, 2008 @12:52AM (#22105356) Homepage Journal
    I'm developing a Free Software audio application called Ogg Frog []. It will be GPL when it is released, but I'm not certain whether to make it GPLv2-only, or GPLv3-only. I'm not comfortable with the "or any later version" clauses many GPL programs have.

    I realize that GPLv3 was designed to address a lot of problems such as Tivoization, but in following the debate on the Debian-Legal mailing list, I'm not completely comfortable with choosing version three.

    Trying to actually read the whole license to decide for myself just makes my head spin.

    Note: there is no software to download yet; there won't be any until the alpha test version is ready.

  • by m50d ( 797211 ) on Saturday January 19, 2008 @03:06AM (#22106130) Homepage Journal
    Although Konqueror is a good browser, it's still light-years behind Firefox. Firefox is my bread and butter nowadays, as I suspect it is for many others. I couldn't live with it, and as long as this is true, I couldn't be without Gtk either.

    Just out of interest, what makes you prefer firefox? I switched to konqueror as my primary browser nearly two years ago and haven't looked back - so much faster and "cleaner"-looking.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 19, 2008 @06:21AM (#22107094)

    Because you were cunning enough to use the GPL, you can hold them to ransom, and charge them $1M for a limited license that lets them use your shiny widget in their new project. And whats more, you can sell it all over again the next time someone needs your shiny widget in a non-GPL setting.

    Challenges for you:

    (1) Name one real-world instance where this has happened and unreasonable demands have resulted.

    (2) This can only happen if the "widget" forms a major part of the "new project". See the definition of "derivative work". A work is a derivative work, under copyright law, only if a later work includes as a major part an earlier copyrighted work. So then, this scenario can only happen if: (a) the widget is included in the new project, and (b) the widget forms a major part of the new project. Please explain then how it is in any way unfair that an original author should demand some money if his/her work is to (a) be included in a new proprietary project, and (b) forms a major part of that project.

    (3) Please explain exactly how "the GPL can totally be used against the causes of freedom". The widget was originally released under terms where anyone can use it (as in run the widget's code). How is it not a violation of those terms for someone to re-release it "hidden" as the major piece in a newer product, not pay the original author his fair dues, yet charge the end-user public for the use of the new product? How is doing this not a total "rip-off"?

"You can have my Unix system when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers." -- Cal Keegan