Re: Ghostscript licensing changed to AGPL
> Does that mean that people calling one of these from a script or a web
> service (e.g. invoices using texlive-bin) will need to adhere to the
> AGPL as well?
It depends how it is being used. If a program incorporates AGPL code,
then it, as a whole, must also be licensed under the AGPL.
However, this might not be as bad as it seems. The individual files can
be kept under the GPL. So, if it is possible to distribute a version of
a program without Ghostscript, then you can take out the Ghostscript
parts and distribute it under the GPL.
Furthermore, this separation could simply be put into another package -
if you choose to download the Ghostscript extension, then you are bound
by the GPL, but otherwise, you aren't.
Or, you could simply use an outdated version of Ghostscript, which would
still be under the GPL.