Big development in the GUI realm

[Joe]

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:01:51 +0100, "Fredrik Lundh"
<fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote:
>except that if *you* set things up so the code is combined when run, *you* are
>copying, distributing, and/or modifying the program in order to mix, include and/or
>combine your work with the GPL:ed work.
>
>if you leave all that to the user, you're clear.

Mmm... I'm not playing games here, no matter what some seem to think. 

It's obvious that the GPL doesn't say precisely whether it's OK to use
an _independent_ library or EXE, ie. a file that is physically
different from the calling EXE, as oppposed to either copy/pasting the
code as is into a program, or statically linking a library into an
EXE.

Until now, I understood the GPL to be a way to make sure no one stole
code (hence, no static linking or copy/pasting code), and with or
without giving back any change they made.

OTOH, I though it was OK to use the by code shipping whatever standard
binary file was downloaded from the project's site, ie. MYEXE.EXE
calling YOURCODE.DLL was OK, when this code was the standard version,
untampered, and clearly indicated as not the EXE's work (as shown by
the file name and version infos).

Hence, either the GPL was not precise enough, or TrollTech should use
a different license that specifically prohibits even using Qt through
dynamic linking.

Conclusion from what I read above: As of now, no court in any country
has settled this issue by specifying whether making use of a GPLed
program _in any way_ requires the calling program to be GPLed as well,
or if there are cases where the EXE can remain closed-source. I'm fine
with TT's intentions, though.

Joe
(no, I don't want whatever stuff I post on the Net to possibly bite me
years from now, hence the anonymous posting. Nothing personal.)