On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 07:40:42PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Arc Riley <arcriley@gmail.com> [080823 14:31]: > > What was proposed was that every single user of the software would be > > required to host, on their own server and at their own expense, or even over > > the same net access through which remote access to the software is provided, > > a copy of the source code for every piece of AGPLv3 licensed software they > > wanted to use. > > > > What I am continually having to re-iterate in this thread is that this only > > applies to those who are running modified copies of code which is not > > already available online, that a free VCS solution is suitable, and it > > you're only required to share the source code with people you've already > > opted to allow remote access to your modified version. > > So everything is fine until someone wants to modify the software. > But if they do, you say they are no longer allowed to run it without > fullfilling some restrictions. I fail to see how anyone can consider that free. How is that different to the GPL? The GPL requires anybody who distributes the software to fulfill some restrictions (i.e., provide source). The only difference I can see is that under the AGPL, "usage" always implies "distribution", which I don't think is completely unreasonable for webapps and similar. -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: bma@subvert.org.uk web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0
Attachment:
pgp7ijqJY5O2n.pgp
Description: PGP signature