On Tuesday 24 March 2009 20:32:10 MJ Ray wrote: > Here the scenario becomes impossible IMO - if Z is truly a bad actor, > Z will always either find a way to withhold their source code or > develop on an alternative A's application. AGPL may hinder Z, but > would not prevent it. I hesitate to highlight the loopholes, but I > think they've been posted here before. I'm for full-disclosure of loopholes. I've posted about one before: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/12/msg00061.html The kernel is: "... ironically, if there is an AGPLv3 work that already has the give-remote-users-source-code feature and I'm making modifications to the work, I'm obligated to keep that feature there, unless I remove it." There are other weaknesses ripe for exploitation by someone who really doesn't want to follow the "spirit" of the license. This is true of most licenses, including the GPL (even v3), but I think the AGPL is particularly weak (at least the "A" part is). -- Wesley J. Landaker <wjl@icecavern.net> <xmpp:wjl@icecavern.net> OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094 0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.