Re: issues with the AGPL

[Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr>]

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 03:23:21PM -0600, Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> 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."

I read your email and I think you are partially mistaken:
Copyright law in most juridiction restrict plain modification of
softwares, even without further copy and/or redistribution 
(outside modifications that fall under fair-use or equivalent limitations),
so you have to accept the license to have the right to modify the software
in the first place, even if you do not distribute it.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org> (please CC me)

Imagine a large red swirl here.