User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Care needed with the term "free"

Care needed with the term "free"

Posted Jan 29, 2009 5:16 UTC (Thu) by bignose (subscriber, #40)
Parent article: Nokia relicenses Qt

LWN is usually careful when referring to something as "free". This article, though, regresses somewhat:

> Trolltech (now known as Qt Software) started marketing the Qt cross-platform library in 1996, and made the X11 version available under a free use, code available license.

No, they made the code available under a *zero-cost*, code-available license. It was certainly not free use (notably, it restricted redistribution of modified versions); that was, indeed, the entire point of the controversy around the license.

(Log in to post comments)

Stallman's criticism

Posted Jan 29, 2009 16:50 UTC (Thu) by donbarry (guest, #10485) [Link]

I'd like to correct a misapprehension in the article concerning
Stallman's role: his criticism was against Qt's original non-free
license! When Trolltech converted from the QPL to the GPL, Stallman
congratulated them and retracted his concerns, though he still preferred
to cheer the GNOME camp because they had had to take up the mantra
from scratch, and were considered part of the GNU team (remember,
GNOME stands for GNU Object Model Environment -- even if the
corporate-types shunned Stallman from the GNOME board, which is forever
to their discredit).

Stallman's criticism

Posted Jan 29, 2009 22:30 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

GNOME stands (stood?) for GNU Network Object Model Environment.

With the demise of bonobo the Network part seems to have been lost :/

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds