[Qt-interest] LGPL and static linking

[Stephen Jackson]

2009/11/25 David Ching :
>
>
>> What is Nokias view of static linking and LGPL?
>>
>
> At the Qt Developer Days in San Francisco earlier this month, there were two
> excellent presentations by a woman from the legal counsel of Nokia Qt
> Development Frameworks.  She said within Nokia they explicitly prohibit
> static linking of their LPGL applications due to vagueness of the terms in
> the LPGL 2.1 wording.  She said the wording could be interpreted differently
> based on the jurisdiction, and the jurisdiction might be the one of the end
> user, not the one where the app developer (i.e. you) lives.  So unless you
> want to open yourself to the interpretation of law in whatever jurisdiction
> your end user lives, it is wise to stay away from static linking.  She
> recommended consulting your own attorney and said all she could do was to
> explain what Nokia themselves do.
>

If that is true then I am astounded. If Nokia is concerned about
"vagueness of the terms in the LPGL 2.1 wording", then why ever did it
choose to adopt this licence rather than some other one that says
precisely what Nokia intends to say?

-- 
Stephen Jackson