>>51963617
4chan is not Google. Search it yourself, faggot.

>>51963617
No. That's the definition of commercial use.

Idk about vs but Qt has listening terms. Go to their website and find out.

Yes for Visual Studio.

No for Qt.

Both. Visual Studio is fair game, the free version si just missing some features. Qt is LGPL so you should be able to use that too, as long as you don't modify it yourself

Dunno about VS but Qt is LGPL. You can link it against proprietary software w/ violating the licence. Only modification to the libraries themselves need to be published.

>>51963617
Qt is under the LGPL so you're free to sell it

>>51963803
You can still sell modified versions you just have to provide source code.

>>51963891
well I don't play to modify the IDE, framework, libraries just use it to make software and make money

5 seconds of google

http://www.qt.io/licensing/

>>51964246
so tl;dr yes, it's legal?

>>51964377
GOD DAMN IT

Yes, but provide your users with the source code to all LGPL libraries, link dynamically, notify your users about the LGPL parts and that they can compile themselves and give instructions on how to link the application to a custom compiled Qt themselves.
You also need to host the Qt libraries yourself, you can't just say "yeah, go to Qt and download".

>>51963617
This is a copyright question and a contract question. If the software contains code that is copyrighted, then you need a license from the copyright owner to sell copies. While it may be true that the copyright owner gives away copies for free, it does not follow that you have the right to make copies nor sell copies. Also, if your license to make copies has a clause that says you cant sell the copies for profit, then your fucked again. So make sure what you are selling doesn't contain copyrighted code and if it does make sure you have a license to sell for profit.

>>51963617
Yes, IF you provide your source code. Qt is LGPL.

>>51965890
You don't have to if you just link to it