Community License and Mobile App Stores (Open Source App Project)
-
Hi,
How does the community license affect the distribution of a free and open source mobile app?
According to the download page, it can't be distributed via app stores, what looks askew, at least.Searching this forum, I've found one or two isolated answers stating that we can distribute it if we follow LGPL (3, I suppose) to the letter, or maybe even GPL; what is not a problem for us.
Still, the download page, when differentiating the Community License from the others, actually revokes the right to distribute via public app stores, as per the image below. Does that mean that if I create an open source GPL'd app using QtCreator and probably QML I would not be able to distribute it unless I get a license other than Community? Thank you.
!http://i.imgur.com/NJHdxKP.png(Qt Commuinity License)!
-
IANAL, but the situation is as follows.
Apple Store doesn't allow dynamically linked libraries.
Static linking LGPL library requires you to release the app source code, for it requires you to provide a way for the user to change the library if they want.
For Android I think the dynamic linking is not a problem.
There is some discussion about LGPL and dual release, so you would release a statically linked version in Apple Store and a separate dynamically linked version somewhere else, thus complying with the LGPL and Apple store policies.
Indie license allows static linking without releasing the source, so it solves the issue, if the dual releasing is not okay with the LGPL. For that I don't know the answer.
-
According to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Lesser_General_Public_License
"Essentially, if it is a "work that uses the library", then it must be possible for the software to be linked with a newer version of the LGPL-covered program. The most commonly used method for doing so is to use "a suitable shared library mechanism for linking". Alternatively, a statically linked library is allowed if either source code or linkable object files are provided.[2]"
-
Oh, thank you for your answers!
Still, my software would be probably licensed under GPL, so anyone would have a mechanism for relinking Qt or any other library, the source code itself. The problem is that the download page actually contradicts Qt's GPL license when talking about open source GPL'd and LGPL'd projects, what is actually the only case given that these are the only possible licenses for projects using the Community License.
I will just use it and ignore that, apparently misinformative, char on the download page.
