[Interest] Fwd: vs. Flutter

Julius Bullinger julius.bullinger at gmail.com
Thu Feb 21 15:56:24 CET 2019

On 21.02.2019 15:44, Christian Gagneraud wrote:
> Qt is free (on mobile), free as in liberty, as long as your
> application is free, as in liberty.
> That's basic (L)GPL rules.
> Now there's the business rules:
> If you want your (mobile) app to be non-free (as in proprietary), then
> you'll have to pay the Qt company for that. Disregarding the fact that
> you want to make money or not.

Please do not spread this misinformation! As long as you adhere to the 
terms of LGPL, you can create non-free, proprietary and closed apps with 
Qt (or any other LGPL library for that matter). You only need to make 
sure that the user can replace all LGPL parts with their own builds.

The fact that the mobile OS's and app stores make it exceptionally hard 
to do that is not an issue with the license terms. If you find a way 
that enables the user to replace LGPL parts (for example by dynamic 
linking or by making all object files and linking instructions available 
on request), that's perfectly valid and legal.

_That_ is a basic LGPL rule.



More information about the Interest mailing list