Is GNU AGPLv3+ the strongest copyleft license ?
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben
I think GNU AGPLv3+ is the strongest copyleft license.
quote:"The GNU Affero General Public License is a modified version of the ordinary GNU GPL version 3. It has one added requirement: if you run the program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the program that it's running. If what's running there is your modified version of the program, the server's users must get the source code as you modified it."
So, if you are developer who likes Free Software, you better use GNU AGPLv3+ instead of GNU GPLv3+
I think it is and I use it for my software when it's complex enough. I
think there are improvements possible: it's not strong enough in some
cases (e.g. the antitivoization clause doesn't apply to software that
isn't provided with the device: this can be applied to restricted boot
and maybe to app stores if there were ones compatible with the GPL) and
it's not easy to provide the corresponding source when deploying a
program using modern tools.
There is a bigger problem: usually there aren't AGPL-licensed
dependencies that would significantly help. Most libraries that my
project uses are BSD-licensed, the rest is GPL2+, none are AGPL (I'm
looking for techically useful AGPL3+-compatible ones, others
specifically avoid the AGPL). For some reasons, Web libraries have
permissive licenses and non-Web complex programs like Emacs or GCC have
GPL, not AGPL, so running them in separate processes allows not
providing their source.
(I have no exprience with the most popular AGPL use of supporting
proprietary relicensing and open core business models.)
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben