[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Is AGPLv3 DFSG-free?


Am Mittwoch, den 03.09.2008, 20:13 +0200 schrieb Francesco Poli:
> If being usable in an SSH session counts as "supporting" remote
> interaction "through a computer network", then basically every program
> supports such interaction!  This would mean that any AfferoGPLv3'ed
> program must comply with the restrictions of section 13, even when it
> is not designed to be used through a network.
> I mean, if some AfferoGPLv3'ed code is included in a modified version
> of, say, OpenOffice.org, the modifier has to offer access to the whole
> Corresponding Source, if he/she installs his/her modified version on a
> box with an SSH server and at least one other user...
> I seem to remember that the parenthetical "(if your version supports
> such interaction)" is there just to avoid to extend the restriction to
> programs not specifically designed for network use.
> But maybe I am wrong.
> If I am wrong, the AfferoGPLv3 is even worse than I thought!

Hmmm, let’s see: If some company takes a hypothetical AGPL-licensed
variant of OpenOffice, improves it heavily and incompatibly, and it
becomes the new de-facto standard for office document exchange – but
they don’t distribute it, but put it on terminal servers, maybe with
expensive access ...

... then, in the spirit of Free Software, I’ll be thankful that due to
the AGPL I, as a user, can get the source from it.

Therefore, not by word-by-word interpretation, but by respecting the
spirit of the DFSG in the light of new developments, I consider AGPL
licensed works as acceptable for Debian. (This is, in a sense, a
political statement.)


Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Reply to: