Re: APSL 2.0

[Stephen Ryan <taketwoaspirin@deepthought.dartmouth.edu>]

On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 06:51, MJ Ray wrote:
> Adam Warner <lists@consulting.net.nz> wrote:
> > Here's a mere consequence: If Debian is persuaded that the APSL 2.0 is
> > DFSG-free then a subsequent revision of the GPL with the addition of a
> > viral electronic service clause would also be DFSG-free.
> 
> It is expected that GPL-3 will contain something similar to the Affero GPL
> requirement for remote services to offer users the code.  Do you object
> to that?  If so, why?  If you are offering interaction with the code
> via some sort of remote procedure call, you are not using it privately
> for your own ends and some of the users may want to adapt the software,
> which is a freedom normally offered by free software.

I have a web site on a server that I control.  Every piece of software
on that server is there to assist in rendering or managing the web site
in some way or another.  I'm aware that Apache and the Linux kernel are
not under an Affero-type license, but suppose with me for a moment that
the whole installation was under such a license.  I'm now liable to
distribute the source code for an entire operating system to every
person who manages to obtain a web page from me.  I'm also liable to
distribute the source code for an entire operating system to every
sco'er in the world who manages to send me a spam, because they're
"using" my email service.  If such a bit is added to the GPL with no
other changes, I either have to deliver the source code with every web
page (or spam), or I have to promise to keep it up there for a minimum
of three years.  All of a sudden, licensing SCO or Windows looks cheap
by comparison - at least they only demand the large payment once.

Thankfully, this is all hypothetical at this point, and the kernel and
Apache are both licensed under a different license (GPLv2 only, and
Apache has its own license), but I'm bothered by the fact that this is
being put forth as "free".  As Adam points out, this is a networked
world; if I can only afford to exercise my freedom by not being
networked (being a hermit), that freedom is *worthless*.