4 ms·
I believe so, and this is why the AGPL was created: > The GNU General Public License permits making a modified version and letting the public access it on a se
by bo1024 5y ago
I believe so, and this is why the AGPL was created:
> The GNU General Public License permits making a modified version and letting the public access it on a server without ever releasing its source code to the public.
> The GNU Affero General Public License is designed specifically to ensure that, in such cases, the modified source code becomes available to the community.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html
- sydthrowaway 5y agoSo in theory, FAANG could make billions of a random person's GPL'd code and they'd never know.
- thatfunkymunki 5y agoSpoiler alert: vast majority of FAANG systems run on Linux, making billions for them.
- mkr-hn 5y agoDon't they also provide a lot of developer time through patches?
- notsureaboutpg 5y agoThey sure do, but having worked at such a place, the companies are using way more free labor in open source software than they are giving back. In a way, everyone is doing that as well. I certainly use more free software than I contribute free software / dev time to free software
- david_allison 5y agoThis is a common occurrence. Modifications don't need to be shared back to the community if the software is used internally or behind a webserver.
- kobalsky 5y agoamazon and google both created managed version of popular open source software like grafana and airflow and they are priced at a premium.
- mrintegrity 5y agografana is agplv3 but grafana the company has a deal with amazon to grant them a special licence
- noir_lord 5y agoAWS did this with a bunch of stuff including Elastic. https://www.elastic.co/blog/why-license-change-AWS https://www.elastic.co/blog/why-license-change-AWS
- RNCTX 5y agoThe AGPL was created so that for-profit, not-free software can get free QA and put an open-source blurb on their landing page, be honest.