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

Re: Ghostscript licensing changed to AGPL

On Wed, 7 May 2014 15:56:06 +0200 Bálint Réczey wrote:

> 2014-05-07 14:37 GMT+02:00 Thorsten Glaser <tg@debian.org>:
> > On Wed, 7 May 2014, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >
> >> Yes.  But this isn't as bad as you think, because the source
> >> availability requirement exists only if you modify the AGPL'd
> >> software.
> >
> > Which you may want to do, in order to patch a security issue
> > you just found, locally, before filing it upstream.
> In my interpretation in this case I would have some reasonable time to
> comply, i.e.
> I don't have to publish all 0days on my site if I run AGPL-covered software.

Hi Bálint,
I don't think there's any clause in the GNU AfferoGPL v3 that allows to
delay the availability of source for remote users.
I am under the impression that you would have to comply immediately
after making the program accessible to remote users.

 New GnuPG key, see the transition document!
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE

Attachment: pgp6TVx3zDO2Z.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: