[colejohnson66]

The code being free does not mean usage is free. Qt’s code is free to look at, but you still need to pay them for certain things. Licenses apply to the code, not what it does.

[InsomniacL]

Firstly, I was addressing the claim in the comment I replied to that it's not open source. It's licenced under MIT

That's not what the licence states at all...

> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person ... including without limitation the rights to use .. copies of the Software.

The licence states Permission is granted free of charge to use the software, if the software is charging then that's a breach of the licence..?

[abofh]

They used the software, it did what it was programmed to do. The breach seems entirely on the licensee