[Development] New company name for Qt part of Digia and unified web site

[Thiago Macieira]

On Wednesday 17 September 2014 14:06:15 André Somers wrote:
> Absolutely. FOSS users have, by definition, every right to modify the 
> source code. So yes, the current qt.io site is very misleading there. 

> They just don't have the right to publish closed source software based 
> on those modified sources without releasing those modifications to their 
> users (well, sort off. It is of course a bit more involved than that.)

That last sentence is true, but unrelated to making modifications. Every user 
of Qt under the LGPL must publish the version of Qt they used, REGARDLESS of 
whether they modified it or not. They have to publish it on their own servers.

Pointing to qt-project.org or qt.io servers is not enough to fulfil the 
requirements of the licence. The licence requires that the distributor of the 
software (v2) or the "conveyor" of the software (v3) also offer the source of 
the library. It's the responsibility of that person and you cannot pass it 
along to someone else.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center