Re: GR proposal: the AGPL does not meet the DFSG (take 2)
The Fungi wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:07:12PM +0000, David Claughton wrote:
>> It is always possible to modify free software in ways that effectively
>> make it non-free - for example if you remove all the copyright
>> statements from a BSD covered program.
> This is untrue, at least for modern 3-clause BSD[*] and its
> derivatives. I can remove the copyright statements from any
> BSD-licensed software I like, as long as I don't *redistribute* it
> in that form. By my reading, licenses like BSD or (classic) GPL
> place no restrictions on use, even of modified versions.
Distribution is what we're talking about here - if you can no longer
redistribute it then it has become non-free.
> The AGPL
> goes a great deal further than this, by *requiring* you to become a
> distributor of software you use, even if you only do something so
> simple as make a minor modification to an AGPL-covered work
> providing a network service.
You are only required to distribute the source if you choose to run it
on a publicly accessible server. If it's on your own machine or a
private server and no-one outside your organisation can access it, then
you don't have to worry about it.
If you are only distributing the software conventionally then you only
have to provide or offer the source in exactly the same way as required