3 ms·

>> This is why I like the GPLv3 license. Sure it excludes my work from ever being considered in a large corporate project but I'll never have to worry about bei

>> This is why I like the GPLv3 license. Sure it excludes my work from ever being considered in a large corporate project but I'll never have to worry about being beaten over the head with my own product by one of them either. Not true. Even GPL code is able to have proprietary modifications so long as the code stays in-house. As a cloud provider, Amazon can do an end run around the license by simply providing access to your code (with their proprietary modifications) via Web APIs. That was the root of the whole MongoDB debacle, and several minor skermishes with Redis Labs.

jessaustin 8y ago
That's the purpose of AGPLv3, the Affero variant that was written to close the "ASP loophole". This has been out a long time. Unfortunately the anti-copyleft zealots have discouraged creators from adopting it. [EDIT:] I thought the "MongoDB debacle" was the wide-open default auth thing? I don't see how that connects...
- dralley 8y ago
  Look up mongodb licensing
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    OK, I can understand what MongoDB are thinking with SSPL: make the open source license so onerous (using this software requires you to open source your entire stack) that any ASP has to come to them for a commercial license. That makes sense for them, and probably for several other firms. However MongoDB were previously using AGPL, which specifically does not allow AWS to close their modifications. It's probably an open question as to whether Amazon can purchase enough judges to make the point moot, but the license itself is at least trying to keep the software free. In the long run if AWS abides by the license and releases all updates to their Mongo fork it will strengthen AGPL. Admittedly, I've been unable to find the repo through which that's happening now, so maybe my hopes are already dashed...
    - _msw_ 8y ago
      Disclosure: I work at AWS, but I do not directly work on DocumentDB, and I have no personal experience with MongoDB's server code. But I am familiar with the facts regarding how AWS provides services that include open source code. AWS has never used the AGPL licensed MongoDB code as part of a service, therefore the license change from AGPL to SSPL has nothing to do with AWS. There is no "Mongo fork" as you stated above. See more in MongoDB's FAQ about the triggers for changing the license, in particular "international cloud vendors". https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license/faq#what-we-sell https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license...

jessaustin 8y ago

That's the purpose of AGPLv3, the Affero variant that was written to close the "ASP loophole". This has been out a long time. Unfortunately the anti-copyleft zealots have discouraged creators from adopting it. [EDIT:] I thought the "MongoDB debacle" was the wide-open default auth thing? I don't see how that connects...

dralley 8y ago
Look up mongodb licensing
- jessaustin 8y ago
  OK, I can understand what MongoDB are thinking with SSPL: make the open source license so onerous (using this software requires you to open source your entire stack) that any ASP has to come to them for a commercial license. That makes sense for them, and probably for several other firms. However MongoDB were previously using AGPL, which specifically does not allow AWS to close their modifications. It's probably an open question as to whether Amazon can purchase enough judges to make the point moot, but the license itself is at least trying to keep the software free. In the long run if AWS abides by the license and releases all updates to their Mongo fork it will strengthen AGPL. Admittedly, I've been unable to find the repo through which that's happening now, so maybe my hopes are already dashed...
  - _msw_ 8y ago
    Disclosure: I work at AWS, but I do not directly work on DocumentDB, and I have no personal experience with MongoDB's server code. But I am familiar with the facts regarding how AWS provides services that include open source code. AWS has never used the AGPL licensed MongoDB code as part of a service, therefore the license change from AGPL to SSPL has nothing to do with AWS. There is no "Mongo fork" as you stated above. See more in MongoDB's FAQ about the triggers for changing the license, in particular "international cloud vendors". https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license/faq#what-we-sell https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license...