Qt LGPL unclear

[giowck]

Regarding Visual Studio Express: http://www.microsoft.com/express/sup...pport-faq.aspx

Can I use Express Editions for commercial use?

Yes, there are no licensing restrictions for applications built using Visual Studio Express Editions.

something like that is clear! If they say no license restrictions i can use it without pain

[wysota]

Regarding Visual Studio Express: http://www.microsoft.com/express/sup...pport-faq.aspx



something like that is clear! If they say no license restrictions i can use it without pain

Can I use MSVC Express Edition for LGPL applications? Can I distribute the MSVC runtime dlls with my application? Can I licence my application with the same licence as used for MSVC Express Edition? Are users of my software compiled using EE also bound by the licence and if so then on what ground? There are always questions that can be asked and only lawyers are entitled to answer them. I'm sure one of the first arguments after bringing up the statement you quoted in court would be this was not a legal counsel writing that FAQ and it has no value in court because the licence itself is the only document both sides agreed to follow and the passage from the Internet website is just a free interpretation having nothing to do with the document itself.

BTW. For me it is clear you can use LGPL components in commercial applications - this yields no doubts. Only that sometimes some person arrives somewhere and asks that question again bringing another pointless discussion about it.

5. A program that contains no derivative of any portion of the Library, but is designed to work with the Library by being compiled or linked with it, is called a "work that uses the Library". Such a work, in isolation, is not a derivative work of the Library, and therefore falls outside the scope of this License.

And the next paragraph covers the executable linking situation:

However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable is therefore covered by this License. Section 6 states terms for distribution of such executables.

Section 6 covers your obligations when distributing your linked application. Please note it is explicitely said that if you link (even statically) against LGPL component, your program can still be closed-source and doesn't have to be distributed under LGPL compatible licence. You only need to provide means for the end user to relink the final software (see section 6a) or to replace the LGPL component with an equivalent (i.e. by dynamic linking - see section 6b). In both situations you have to make sure the end-user has or is able to gain access to the complete source code of the LGPL component (a preferred solution is to provide a verbatim copy of the component along the binary of your application). It is worth noting it is your responsibility to provide means for the user to get that source code - i.e. if Nokia ftp servers fail and the user of your application wants Qt source-code, for three years from sending/distributing your software you have to be prepared to supply the user with a rigid (i.e. on CD) and verbatim copy of Qt's source-code in version which was distributed with your software and you can charge the user for it up to an amount of money equivalent to your expenses of packaging and sending the code.

Section 9 is also interesting. It says that you (i.e. as the end user) do not have to accept this licence as you didn't sign it and it only prevents you from distributing the software. This also implies (although not explicitely) you can use LGPL components in any form you wish for your inhouse private software which you don't distribute to anyone else. You are only not permitted to modify it without accepting the licence.

[giowck]

Thanks to all!

So i understood that if i want to create some free apps without relaesing the sources i need to contact a lawyer.

I mean is there really no way to release my apps?? I'm a student and i can't contact a lawyer just for a free app...

Do you think I can get in trouble?

[squidge]

We don't THINK you will get into trouble, but we are not a legal team, so you need to consider that risk for yourself.

The only ways to GUARANTEE you will not get into trouble:
a) Buy a commercial license (and thus the license is more relaxed, plus you can contact Nokia support for any questions)
b) Release the source code of your application (and so, again, the license is much more relaxed)
c) Contact an approved lawyer
d) Not release your app

Considering the fact that your application is free, Is there a particular reason you don't want to release the source code?

[giowck]

ok i will release the sources...

In the future i will buy a commercial license in order to sell software!

Thanks again!

[wysota]

So i understood that if i want to create some free apps without relaesing the sources i need to contact a lawyer.

No, you don't. Just don't violate the licence in any obvious way. If there is some fragile situation, I'm sure you'll be asked to correct it before Nokia (or owners of other protected components) submits a lawsuit against you

[giowck]

No, you don't. Just don't violate the licence in any obvious way. If there is some fragile situation, I'm sure you'll be asked to correct it before Nokia (or owners of other protected components) submits a lawsuit against you

so only nokia can submit a lawsuit against me? Ok, then if i do something wrong i think i can fix everything by a request!

thanks

[wysota]

so only nokia can submit a lawsuit against me?

If you violate a licence for their product, then yes.