5 ms·

The AGPL won't allow others to do anything they want with it. A public domain license would. And a BSD/MIT license would be closer to a public domain license.

• igorgue 16y ago
  "public domain" is not a license.
  • MikeCapone 16y ago
    It's still a legal creation that acts as a license.
    • sp332 16y ago
      Not in all jurisdictions. In some places, you can never abjure all of your rights (or responsibilities) as owner of intellectual property.
      • joubert 16y ago
        I'm curious, in which jurisdictions are you not able to generate IP that you choose not to own?
        • eru 16y ago
          Germany.
          • joubert 16y ago
            so does this mean that nothing created in germany can be in the public domain in germany / europe?
            • sp332 16y ago
              Yes. You made it, you own it. (Until you explicitly transfer ownership to someone else.)
              • eru 16y ago
                And then you still retain the moral right, or something like that.
    • eru 16y ago
      In some countries.
• ube 16y ago
  I'm not sure that is correct - look at the web applications that use the AGPL license: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AGPL_web_applications http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AGPL_web_applications It seems to me this would allow the service provider approach and the ability to also have a commercial part (like the Funambol dual licensing approach...i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funambol http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funambol). This doesn't seem like an overtly nefarious scheme to reach for your $5 :-)