PDA

View Full Version : can i develope commercial desktop app with qt4.5 lgpl version?



newtowindows
16th October 2009, 18:56
Hi....,
Sorry for asking such stupid question. In fact i was confused with lgpl licensing..
I want to develop a commercial application(closed source) in windows with qt framework.
My requirements are :
1)My application should be commercial and closed source
2)My customers will pay fee to me for using my qt desktop application.
3)I want to use qt 4.5 LGPL windows version for developement.
My Questions are :
1)Can i develop such software by using qt lgpl version?
2)Or should i pay a licensing fee to nokia?
3)Will my customers have to pay fee to nokia for using qt runtime libraries.
4)Is there any best solution which requires my criterea (developing commertial app without paying license fee)

FYI: 1)I wont modify any qt libraries(simply i use them thats it)
2)I want to use 2 physical mediums(cd/dvd) for both my app and qt run time libraries for windows. One cd containd my application's .exe file , another cd conatins qt run libraries without modification.
3)I feel logically i am charging my customers for selling my qt app, not for distributing qt runtime by using two physical mediums.

Correct me if i asked question in a wrong way..I hope you understood my thought.
Advance thanks for your patience.

Lykurg
16th October 2009, 19:06
Short: You can use LGPL.


You have to link the Qt libraries dynamically
You have to say, that you use Qt under LGPL everywhere you have a copy notice in your app and also there must be a "README" on your cd
You don't have to use two cds, you can put all on one.
If you earn a lot of money with your application, by a commercial license to pay tribute to the grate work of Qt!


But consider, I'm not a lawer...

EDIT:

3)Will my customers have to pay fee to nokia for using qt runtime libraries.
no!

newtowindows
17th October 2009, 09:38
Thank you very much, but still some confusion....
Answers with more elaborated way are appreciated.

wysota
17th October 2009, 10:06
If you want a more elaborate answer, why don't you just read the LGPL licence text?

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0-standalone.html

All your questions have already been answered by Lykurg though...