> Could we take a concise and definitive stand for this kind of question.

While I think there's no reason to have this question closed, I don't have an extremely strong opinion on the matter.

But I do have a strong opinion that this question is not a good precedent for anything. In other words, whether or not the question stays closed is fine, but **we should definitely not take a definitive stand about anything else, based on it.** Especially after the edit ("Well at least people should be able to take a look at it") this question is kind of a mess.

Furthermore, consider [my][1] and [Thomas W.][2]'s comments, from *before* that edit:

> @user2366975 I actually think this is a perfectly good question; I
> can't see any good reason to downvote it, though downvotes aren't
> usually a big deal. I'm more troubled by the idea that any
> license-related question is automatically requesting actual legal
> advice. In any case, *you could improve this question* by editing it
> to provide more details about your goals and about *how you plan to
> license the software you intend to sell*. Will your software be
> [proprietary][3]? Have you already written it to use PyQt? Are you
> considering alternatives?

— Eliah Kagan

> @user2366975 I agree with Eliah, I downvoted your question because I
> don't believe there's sufficient information here to answer it. If you
> provide more information as an edit to your question, I will remove
> the downvote, but not until there's enough information to be at least
> somewhat answerable. As it stands there's not enough information and
> it's just a general "legal" question...

— Thomas W.

Thomas W. and I actually *don't agree* on some things about this question. For example, he thinks it should be closed and I think it should be open. What I believe we may agree about is that **the problems with the question are due to the way it was asked, not to the fundamental nature of what was asked.**

The recent edit to the question attempts to clarify things but actually makes them murkier. It doesn't attempt to address most of the questions asked in comments, and it seems to confuse "open source" with "users can read the source code."

So, **no**, we should not take a definitive stand for this "kind of question." This question is not a suitable example to work with to make any general policy about anything. That moderators seem unclear about whether or not the question is on-topic is further suggestive evidence that this question should not be the impetus for any definitive stand on anything.


  [1]: http://askubuntu.com/questions/339723/can-i-sell-my-pyqt4-app-without-having-a-license#comment433549_339723
  [2]: http://askubuntu.com/questions/339723/can-i-sell-my-pyqt4-app-without-having-a-license#comment433553_339723
  [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software