Big development in the GUI realm

[Grant Edwards]

On 2005-02-07, Luke Skywalker <luke at tatooine.planet> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:41:11 +0100, "Fredrik Lundh"
><fredrik at pythonware.com> wrote:
>>> Am I totally off-target?
>>
>>yes.  for details, see the "Combining work with code released under the
>>GPL" section on this page:
>
> Mmmm.. The FAQ isn't very clear about whether it's allowed to write a
> proprietary EXE that calls a GPLed DLL:

Yes it is allowed.  You are always allowed to write proprietary
programs that incorporate GPL code.  What you are not allowed
to do is distribute those programs under a license that's not
the GPL.

> Considering the fact that the Qt DLL exist by themselves, that the
> version used is the one provided by Qt, and that the EXE uses a
> standard, open way to communicate with it, the above does seem to say
> this use would be valid. Anybody knows of a similar case and the
> output?

My understanding is that what you propose is not valid.  An EXE
that uses a GPL'd DLL must be distributed according to the
terms of the GPL.  Were that not the case, the LGPL would not
have been needed.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  Yow! Maybe I should
                                  at               have asked for my Neutron
                               visi.com            Bomb in PAISLEY--