On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 07:40:42PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > * Arc Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080823 14:31]: > > What was proposed was that every single user of the software would be > > required to host, on their own server and at their own expense, or even over > > the same net access through which remote access to the software is provided, > > a copy of the source code for every piece of AGPLv3 licensed software they > > wanted to use. > > > > What I am continually having to re-iterate in this thread is that this only > > applies to those who are running modified copies of code which is not > > already available online, that a free VCS solution is suitable, and it > > you're only required to share the source code with people you've already > > opted to allow remote access to your modified version. > > So everything is fine until someone wants to modify the software. > But if they do, you say they are no longer allowed to run it without > fullfilling some restrictions. I fail to see how anyone can consider that > free.
How is that different to the GPL? The GPL requires anybody who distributes the software to fulfill some restrictions (i.e., provide source). The only difference I can see is that under the AGPL, "usage" always implies "distribution", which I don't think is completely unreasonable for webapps and similar. -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0
pgpp0MHkUu2MQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
