Well then you can't contribute to Qt because of the dual license.
We endure the closed source because the open source side still benefits. Really
it's a mutually beneficial arrangement.
________________________________
From: Nikos Chantziaras <rea...@gmail.com>
To: interest@qt-project.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Interest] Contributor agreement rundown
I was under the impression that the LGPL is perfectly suitable for
proprietary applications. I don't want to sound like a greedy
egomaniac, but giving code I intend to be open source to be used under a
proprietary license without me getting paid sounds like a rip-off.
On 18/04/12 03:57, Scott Aron Bloom wrote:
> Yes you did..
>
> Otherwise, they would have to keep a separate branch, one for opensource one
> for commercial.
>
> Anything you submit can be incorporated in both.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs....@qt-project.org
> [mailto:interest-bounces+scott.bloom=onshorecs....@qt-project.org] On Behalf
> Of Nikos Chantziaras
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 5:55 PM
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Interest] Contributor agreement rundown
>
> I went to register for a Gerrit account. There I saw that I must agree to a
> "contributor agreement". It's very legalese, so I'm not sure if it means
> what I think it means: Nokia can transform open source code I contribute into
> non-open code?
>
> "Licensor hereby grants, in exchange for good and valuable consideration, the
> receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, to Nokia a
> sublicensable, irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free
> and fully paid-up copyright and trade secret license to reproduce, adapt,
> translate, modify, and prepare derivative works of, publicly display,
> publicly perform, sublicense, make available and distribute Licensor
> Contribution(s) and any derivative works thereof under license terms of
> Nokia’s choosing including any Open Source Software license."
>
> The beef is the phrase "under license terms of Nokia’s choosing", which can
> be an open license, but is not required to.
>
> Did I understand that correctly?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
