2

I'm using Qt Open source so I have my software under GPL-3 license. I would like the engine to be free for users that are not using their output games for commercial use. For commercial use, I would like to ask for some fees. I know that as long as a user pay fees for the software license it can be redistribute without charges and that's the wrong point. What about outputs?

What the output contains:

  • Javascript interpreted source code under GPL-3 license
  • Assets (does GPL license allows me to produce output containing commercial assets?)
  • Dynamically linked Qt libraries
  • Executable generated by Qt

I was thinking about asking users for autorization for using assets under that license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. However, I guess that Iloose all the rights to ask for fees if they remove the assets and use their own assets. Is there any possible trick to do my purpose?

Improve this question
7
  • 1
    Possible duplicate of Non-commercial licensing recommendation
    – MadHatter ♦
    Commented Mar 29, 2019 at 9:59
  • Thanks for the link. I'm not sure about having to put my JavaScript source code under GPL-3 license since it can work on any web browser without any change. Qt only makes it available on desktop application. Can I use a dual license to use CC-Non-Commercial for my creations (assets + JavaScript code)?
    – Nat
    Commented Mar 29, 2019 at 10:18
  • That seems to me to be a completely different question; it would be better to ask it as one.
    – MadHatter ♦
    Commented Mar 29, 2019 at 10:19
  • 1
    What makes this interesting in my mind is the fact that you can get a non-free license for Qt for use in closed source/commercial work. But.. If I use your Qt-gpl based game to go non-free I'd need a non-free Qt license as well - depending on how your code is structured, it may not be GPL-able in that case. Alternatively, you could hire lawyers and figure out how to duplicate Qt's dual license setup.
    – ivanivan
    Commented Mar 31, 2019 at 2:40
  • 1
    In fact, I didn't see that a large set of Qt libraries were also under LGPL-3 license. If I understand it well, this makes me able to have my output under another license even if it's using Qt libraries. I just have to use dynamic linking.
    – Nat
    Commented Apr 1, 2019 at 7:24

0

Reset to default

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.