2 ms·
Because the AGPL, like the GFDL, is not a free software license. It doesn't allow running the software in reasonable ways. For example, given an AGPL full text
by brians 9y ago
Because the AGPL, like the GFDL, is not a free software license. It doesn't allow running the software in reasonable ways.
For example, given an AGPL full text search program expected to run over a web interface (and offer source over that interface), I cannot adapt it to run over postcard, SMS, or amateur shortwave radio.
- vog 9y ago> is not a free software license Not sure which standards you are applying here, but AGPL is accepted by FSF, DFSG and OSI. It is clearly a FLOSS licence regarding whatever authority you want to cite. (And just to be clear, we are talking about the latest version of AGPL, AGPLv3, right?) > For example, given an AGPL full text search program expected to run over a web interface (and offer source over that interface), I cannot adapt it to run over postcard, SMS, or amateur shortwave radio. Can you cite any laywer or AGPL representative who shares that interpretation? Otherwise, Poe's Law is strong here. What's the point, for the sake if a civil discussion, in deliberately misinterpreting the AGPL in such an exaggerated way?
- the8472 9y agoIANAL, but the AGPL only requires that you offer the source when a user interacts with it over a computer network. postcard and radio clearly do not qualify as such. Whether SMS qualifies might require some lawyer reading entrails. And you could build your SMS service on top of a network interface. Network interaction is not considered conveying the work, so it is not affected by the conveing and combined work clauses of the AGPL. In other words: Linking is viral, the must-present-source part is not if you build services and the like.