Qtopia Phone Licensing Issue
lpotter at trolltech.com
Tue Apr 1 19:38:27 CEST 2008
Wolfgang Spraul wrote:
> Graeme -
> please provide exact information for the libamr license. If it is
> 'unknown', it may be 'in the public domain'.
> For openssl, we should add GnuTLS support.
I think this is a great idea. If you can do it without removing openssl
support, we would probably accept a patch.
> Honestly I think both cases do not sound very dramatic to me.
> But it's great you keep a watchful eye and help us do the due diligence :-)
> On Apr 1, 2008, at 9:36 PM, Graeme Gregory wrote:
>> Well it looks like no-one did due diligence on the qtopia licenses and I
>> think in fact Openmoko cannot distribute the result of a qtopia build.
>> Ive just done a quick check on qtopia source and so far have found two
>> licensing problems.
>> 1) libamr, listed as FREEWARE in source, seems to be the libamr
>> distributed by the 3gpp group with an unknown license. A google search
>> for other projects using this library seems to indicate the general
>> consensus that it is not GPL compatible.
>> 2) openssl, although it is Ok for qtopia to link against openssl. It is
>> not Ok for the stuff in src/3rdparty to be forced to link against
>> openssl without license clauses to this effect.
>> I think until this licensing issue is cleaned up that we cannot
>> distribute any qtopia-phone images.
>> Especially as Harald used to be our leader.
Lorn 'ljp' Potter
Software Engineer, Systems Group, MES, Trolltech
More information about the distro-devel