gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: SSPL or server side public license, GNU better update the AGPL


From: Jean Louis
Subject: Re: SSPL or server side public license, GNU better update the AGPL
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2021 14:35:05 +0300
User-agent: Mutt/2.0.6 (2021-03-06)

* Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> [2021-03-21 14:31]:
> * Jean Louis:
> 
> > MongoDB modifies AGPL to this:
> >
> > If you make the functionality of the Program, or a modified version
> > available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service
> > Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge,
> > under the terms of this License. Making the functionality of the
> > Program or modified version available to third parties as a service
> > includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with
> > the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through
> > a computer network offering a service the value of which entirely or
> > primarily derives from the value of the Program
> >
> > So they use here "must" and exclude only users interacting with it,
> > but include that license shall make software free for everybody.
> 
> The fundamental change is the bit about Service Source Code, which
> covers much more than the Program itself:
> 
> | “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or
> | the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that
> | you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service,
> | including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces,
> | application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software,
> | backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a
> | user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code
> | you make available.  

That is right, that is where should AGPL maybe be updated.

We know from GPL that when there is some software that depends on GPL
software, then such has to be issued under GPL as well. Those could be
some modules, even if distributed separately they may form a part of
the whole.

In that sense AGPL does not ask for those other software that are
built upon or depend straight to the AGPL software to be published,
maybe wording is not enough for those cases.

Jean



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]