On 2014-08-22, at 05:04 AM, Knoll Lars <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 22/08/14 09:29, "Jake Petroules" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-08-22, at 03:21 AM, Knoll Lars <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The goal here is that adopters of those new Qt modules will have to
>>> abide
>>> by the terms of the LGPLv3, which require the ability to replace the Qt
>>> that is on the device on the actual device, thus creating an open
>>> ecosystem for application developers, or instead purchasing a different
>>> licence from Digia, which results in investments in Qt.
>>
>> Can you clarify how this would affect, for example, a closed source
>> Qt-based application on iOS 8.0 using LGPLv3 and dynamic linking (or
>> static linking + providing object files)? Does the FairPlay DRM used by
>> Apple constitute a breach of the requirement to be able to replace the
>> copy of Qt that is on the actual device? Or is this more about the
>> hardware itself being read-only (i.e. baked-in firmware on embedded
>> devices)?
>
> From what I know (and IANAL), the iOS App Store is not really compatible
> with LGPLv3, and even LGPLv2.1 is somewhat questionable. Fortunately I
> can't see any issues with Google Play or the Microsoft Marketplace. Both
> are apparently compatible with LGPLv2.1 and LGPLv3.
What makes the iOS App Store different from the others?
> But as said the modules that we have in Qt 5.3 continue to be available
> under LGPLv2.1.
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
--
Jake Petroules - jake.petroules at petroules.com
Chief Technology Officer - Petroules Corporation
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
