4 ms·
Might want to consider Affero GPL. Without that, there's a possibility some competitor comes along, improves the software, puts it behind a cloud-only service,
by logn 11y ago
Might want to consider Affero GPL. Without that, there's a possibility some competitor comes along, improves the software, puts it behind a cloud-only service, and never publishes the code.
- gohrt 11y agoThat's... Glowforge's business model. The high-level control logic software is in the cloud.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- logn 11y agoThat shouldn't make it Affero GPL incompatible as long as they make the code available. Regardless, if they own the copyright, they don't need to follow Affero GPL despite licensing it that way; it only applies to those who don't have copyright. edit: ok it's only the firmware that's being open sourced. Still I think my original comment applies. Maybe a competitor improves code from the firmware and puts it behind the cloud.
- wutwatt 11y agoConsidering the firmware is the code that directly interfaces with the hardware, how would it even be possible to move it to the cloud?
- logn 11y agoYou're probably right, but I don't see the harm in making firmware Affero GPL. For instance, intimate communication between two programs tends trigger GPL provisions. So there's an argument to be made that if a competitor improves the firmware for another device with a different cloud-powered backend, then that backend code must be released if the firmware is Affero GPL. But my original thought was that maybe there's some useful logic in the firmware that's extracted to cloud. And on that point, it's pretty speculative.
- scrollaway 11y agoAffero GPL would be suitable if they were releasing the serverside code, not the dumb client code. Here, it would make no difference.