John: I'd be happy with proprietary forks, as long as the Attribution provision would hold.
E.g.: if they sell it to other people, those other people still are aware of my original project and have a link to it On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 3:36 AM, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > ldr ldr scripsit: > >> 1. "Badgeware" (as you call it) requirement, i.e.: that every page of >> the site and mobile-apps' have a copyright area which contains: >> "Powered by [project name](github.com/projectname)" or >> "Powered by [new project name]() a fork of [project >> name](github.com/projectname" > > You have to word this very carefully, so that derivative works which > don't have this type of user interface can still be in compliance. > >> 2. A carefully worded closure of the: "ASP loophole" > > The Affero GPL requires users who have access to the server to be > able to download the source of the server software: see clause 13 of > <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html>. Beyond that, we are in > unexplored territory. In particular, it's not clear why you'd want to > require server operators to provide their users with the freedom to obtain > the source, when the BSD license generally permits proprietary forks. > > -- > La mayyitan ma qadirun yatabaqqa sarmadi John Cowan > Fa idha yaji' al-shudhdhadh fa-l-maut qad yantahi. [email protected] > --Abdullah al-Hazred, Al-`Azif http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > _______________________________________________ > License-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
