3 ms·
There's a subtle difference between AGPL and the Commons Clause licenses. AGPL requires network-accessible code to be disclosed & licensed under an AGPL-compat
by fiberoptick 7y ago
There's a subtle difference between AGPL and the Commons Clause licenses.
AGPL requires network-accessible code to be disclosed & licensed under an AGPL-compatible license.
The Commons Clause license outright prohibits SaaS-style offerings of the licensed code.
A lot of startups licensing their code under AGPL might still have AWS et al. eat their lunch, becuase all Amazon needs to do to remain compliant is to publish any modifications made to the AGPL-ed code.
- galaxyLogic 7y agoIt seems to me the difference is not so subtle. As I understand from https://commonsclause.com/ https://commonsclause.com/ you can use Commons Clause licensed code-library as part of your commercial application without having to make your source-code available whereas with AGPL you would have to. But I may be wrong?
- orangeshark 7y agoCommons Clause is added ontop of an exisiting FOSS license. So it will be whatever requirements the base license plus an anti-commercial restriction preventing others from offering SaaS services.
- adrianN 7y agoAGPL is super-banned at all companies because lawyers deem it a huge risk. In particular it's banned at Amazon. IIRC you aren't even allowed to have AGPL software on your laptop at all.
- ethbro 7y agoIn my experience enterprise lawyers deem everything they can't be 100% certain about a huge risk. Legal CYA.