Hi,
On 10-06-14 16:10, David Woolley wrote:
On 10/06/14 06:51, ChanMaxthon wrote:
I believe it is perfectly fine. RMS himself even *encourage* that.
I think people are missing the point here. Assuming the requestor has
used the service, this is a clear violation of clause 13 of the AGPL,
and, if allowed would make the AGPL effectively indistinguishable from
the GPL, as you could select a fee that was so large that it was
unrealistic to exercise the additional rights you gain from the AGPL.
Where you have the option to make an arbitrary charge is for supply of
the software when you never obtained a copy of the software in any
form from them and never used the service based on that software.
If the site is AGPL compliant, there is no need for someone who is
using the service to request anyone to supply the software, as there
will be a link providing a free download.
I assume FullContentRSS has the copyright on their own software, and can
license it as they want. Including selling it to you under AGPLv3,
while not offering a download themselves for their users.
-- Kuno.
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@opensource.org
http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
