On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Alois Treindl wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
>
> >
> > Personally my suggestion would be to adopt the dual QPL/GPL scheme just
> > like Trolltech.
>
> Yes, except for one additional situation:
>
> We find more and more that software is developed not for distribution, but
> for inhouse use in commercial companies, e.g. to power a web application
> which makes money via web services.
>
> We would like this usage to be considered commercial, i.e. requiring
> a paid license.
>
> I am not sure that the GPL serves us here. Someone using Swiss Ephemeris
> unde the GPL could run it in some webservice, without ever paying
> anything, or ever ublishing anything back for the open source community.
>
> I have not looked at the QT license in that respect. Are you aware of that
> situation is covered in a way favourable for QT?
>

My understanding is that the GPL is currently unclear on the topic of web
services and this is going to be addressed in an upcoming GPL v3. I don't
know about the QPL.  I am taking the liberty of ccing your message to
debian-legal as the people there are more knowledgeable on such subjects.

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
La Salle Debain - http://www.braincells.com/debian/

Reply via email to