On Sep 27, 2006, at 12:25 PM, Paul Lutus wrote:
>>   Well, let's put it this way: Qt is dual licensed, one is  
>> commercial,
>> one is GPL. So it *is* free/open source software.
>
> I read this earlier and wondered about it. Can a company really  
> release
> software under the GPL, but place restrictions on its use like "no
> commercial applications"? Do they have that right? I thought the  
> entire
> point of GPL was to make the source available to anyone, for any  
> purpose,
> and the recipients would have the same rights and obligations as the
> originator (like publishing their own source).

Someone using your software under the GPL does not have the right to  
use it for any purpose.

Releasing your software under the GPL does not impose any further  
obligations on you.

As the author (or, copyright holder) of a piece of software, you can  
choose to release it under different licenses to different people.   
Choosing to release your software to someone under the GPL in no way  
restricts your right to release it under a more limited license to  
someone else, or to stop releasing later versions under the GPL at  
all.  The GPL just restricts what someone using your software can  
legally do with it.  It's still your software.

(Waiting for someone to correct my overly broad assertions....)

TomP