3 ms·

For what it’s worth, SSPL is NOT like AGPL. IANAL but... AGPL is community oriented. With AGPL you have to contribute your modifications back even if you are o

by jchw 6y ago

For what it’s worth, SSPL is NOT like AGPL. IANAL but... AGPL is community oriented. With AGPL you have to contribute your modifications back even if you are only offering the application over the network and not in binary form. It extends the copyleft principle. It is still debated whether it even counts as open source. SSPL is fascinating. Let me quote Section 13: > If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service, you must make the Service Source Code available via network download to everyone at no charge, under the terms of this License. Making the functionality of the Program or modified version available to third parties as a service includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version, or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose of the Program or modified version. > “Service Source Code” means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available. Emphasis mine. Basically “release the source for your entire stack.” That’s not the same thing as AGPL. Copyleft is concerned with linkage. This license seems to impose terms on entirely unrelated pieces of software. IANAL but I don’t even think this has been tested in court before.

softwaredoug 6y ago
“release the source code for your entire stack”. It’s not “your entire stack” but rather your entire stack: > If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service ... > Making the functionality of the Program or modified version available to third parties as a service includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version, or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose of the Program or modified version. Where: > “The Program” refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this License.

by jchw 6y ago

softwaredoug 6y ago

“release the source code for your entire stack”. It’s not “your entire stack” but rather your entire stack: > If you make the functionality of the Program or a modified version available to third parties as a service ... > Making the functionality of the Program or modified version available to third parties as a service includes, without limitation, enabling third parties to interact with the functionality of the Program or modified version remotely through a computer network, offering a service the value of which entirely or primarily derives from the value of the Program or modified version, or offering a service that accomplishes for users the primary purpose of the Program or modified version. Where: > “The Program” refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this License.