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/
