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

[Jean Louis]

* Jacob Bachmeyer <jcb62281@gmail.com> [2021-03-22 05:53]:
> Combine that with the requirement that "you must make the Service Source
> Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, *under* *the*
> *terms* *of* *this* *License*" and you have a situation where compliance is
> impossible if any component is GPL, since the GPL does not permit
> relicensing under the SSPL.  In fact, as I understand, the FSF holds
> copyright on the texts of the various GPL-family licenses, and distributes
> them under "verbatim copying only" terms, the AGPL having been produced
> under special permission from the FSF... is the SSPL actually derived from
> the AGPL?  If so, does the SSPL itself infringe the FSF's copyright on the
> GPL license text?

I was under different impression when I have discovered this, but I
don't think we can do something about companies that produce WWW
articles like those changes of licenses. It could be as well all
orchestrated and planned strategy by few of them, it maybe even
attracts online leads and increases their sales.

They made some new derivative license that infringes both on FSF
copyright, and disables people to build upon it. Like you say it was
no well thought, it disables freedom.

Best thing to do is to report MongoDB as being probably not free
software to all fully free software distributions, as it is freedom
issue, but also in Debian and others who respect free software
licensing.

If that license is not free I hope not to get OSI approval, as that is
what they seek to get included in GNU/Linux distributions.