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

Re: Is AGPLv3 DFSG-free?

On Thu, 2008-09-11 at 09:19 -0400, Arc Riley wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 4:08 AM, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>         "Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso" <jordigh@gmail.com> wrote:
>         > One's modification and distribution over a network of that
>         software,
>         > let's be explicit. And I argue that this extra cost is no
>         greater than
>         > the cost of providing the network interface that's
>         triggering this
>         > clause in the first place.
>         I don't know about others, but I am charged for data transfer.
> It has already been made clear that you're not required to distribute
> the modified source on the same network connection as the remote
> interaction.

Suppose the following scenario:

Someone gives you a CD with debian, and you install the weblog tool,
which happens to be agpl.
Your internet connection is two way satalite, 500mb/month, data both
directions costs, and it could be up to 25cents/mb over your quota.

Now imagine because the package you got from debian wasnt finished
(perhaps a typo leaves a path broken), you have to make a change to the
packages source.
You just changed it.
You now have to make it available (with its dependancies? i'm not sure).

Are you suggesting the person now has to upload potentially 10s of MBs
(perhaps theres lots of stock themes, you get the idea), and make it
available to others.
There will be *at least* a one off cost, but thats not what worries me.
What worries me is that the people in this situation *dont realise* what
they got themselves into (its on my debian cd, so i can use it for
personal use however ... right?).

>         Yes, it's absurd to ensure cooperation!  The first point of
>         the first
>         principle of cooperation is "voluntary".
>         http://www.ica.coop/coop/principles.html
> Nobody is being forced to use the software, just as nobody is forced
> to become a member of a cooperative.  Participation remains is
> voluntary.

I'm not worried about people who 'opt in' to agpl software, i'm worried
about people who *dont realise* what agpl means to them, and wind up in
a tricky legal corner.

Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian user / gNewSense contributor
No, I won't join your social networking group

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: