3 ms·
The RMS of twenty years ago would have never approved of such a thing, that he has lent it the imprimatur of the FSF now is testament to his intellectual bankru
by jmillikin 17y ago
The RMS of twenty years ago would have never approved of such a thing, that he has lent it the imprimatur of the FSF now is testament to his intellectual bankruptcy.
I doubt he approves now. I've not been able to find a single essay or even email from him regarding the AGPL, which is interesting considering his standard evangelism regarding other licenses. And he regards SaaS as non-free, regardless of whether the source is available.
Is the AGPL transitive across the network the way the GPL is by linking?
There's no legal precedent (that I know of) for the GPL being transitive across dynamic linking, and if it is, that opens a number of legal problems when linking with Free implementations of proprietary APIs. Static linking is, of course, still covered under standard copyright.
From my non-lawyer reading of the AGPL, it does transit between processes and systems because it covers the output of the application.
- blasdel 17y agohis public silence is odd -- but given that the GPLv3 contains a clause explicitly granting an exemption for use with the AGPL, and the degree to which the FSF is essentially an extension of his person, he must approve in some sense.