4 ms·

>The OSI takes the position that the SSPL is a de facto violation of the freedom to run the program as you wish, because it puts complex and far-reaching restri

>The OSI takes the position that the SSPL is a de facto violation of the freedom to run the program as you wish, because it puts complex and far-reaching restrictions on what other software you can use with the covered software, 4 freedoms is about freedoms of users. End users. you are talking about freedom of intermediaries that SSPL aims to restrict. As an end user, if you are using SSPL licensed software for your own use, will there be any restriction on you? if you integrate SSPL software into your product, will it be restricted? i dont think so. If you want to SAAS-ify this SSPL software, then only the restrictions of SSPL are triggered. Not in any other case.

tpxl 4y ago
Do licenses differentiate between 'end users' and 'intermediaries'? Both the SAAS provider and the consumer use the code, but in a different context.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
  why not? if i use an MIT code as a "user" when i am an "intermediary" and repackage the same as a proprietary one, my "users" will be end users. they will get only proprietary code, rendering incapable of enjoying 4 freedoms. This is the same thing. if your or your downstream end users' freedom gets restricted, that is a problem
  - tpxl 4y ago
    You cannot run a SAAS without using the code, which makes you a user. This means SSPL restricts your freedoms as a user, intermediary or end.
    - 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
      >This means SSPL restricts your freedoms as a user, intermediary or end. doesn't AGPL force you to share you the code to customers? isn't that restricting your freedom of not sharing code?
      - tpxl 4y ago
        Every single freedom ever has restricted the 'counterfreedom'. Freedom from slavery restricts your 'freedom' to keep slaves, freedom to live restricts your 'freedom' to kill, and so forth. Perhaps I should have worded my reply differently. SSPL restricts your freedom to run the code as you wish. The AGPL does restrict your 'freedom to not share the code', but that is not one of the four software freedoms as defined by the FSF.
lmm 4y ago
> if you integrate SSPL software into your product, will it be restricted? i dont think so. That's extremely unclear. Even if it ends up being ok, there's a chilling effect.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
  https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license/faq https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license... >The copyleft condition of Section 13 of the SSPL applies only when you are offering the functionality of MongoDB, or modified versions of MongoDB, to third parties as a service. There is no copyleft condition for other SaaS applications that use MongoDB as a database. no question about it. You use it as a DB, you are clear. it only triggers when you want to serve as a SAAS
  - lmm 4y ago
    That's what they claim, they're not a neutral party and other people who've looked at it say it's not so clear. The FAQ is non-binding, the license text itself is what matters.
    - 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
      https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license please read 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 where does it say otherwise? it starts with "if" meaning only this condition has to be applied and for nothing else
      - tpxl 4y ago
        > make the functionality [...] available [...] as a service This isn't well defined is the problem. What they obviously mean is 'don't offer MongoDB as a service', but this could easily be interpreted far more broadly. If you consider offering a complex, customizable piece of software (like Jira), where your customers can add custom fields and write custom queries, one could reasonably argue you're offering access to MongoDB under a different interface.
simiones 4y ago
Anyone developing a program is a user of that program, in the model of the GPL and the four freedoms it established.

tpxl 4y ago

Do licenses differentiate between 'end users' and 'intermediaries'? Both the SAAS provider and the consumer use the code, but in a different context.

2Gkashmiri 4y ago
why not? if i use an MIT code as a "user" when i am an "intermediary" and repackage the same as a proprietary one, my "users" will be end users. they will get only proprietary code, rendering incapable of enjoying 4 freedoms. This is the same thing. if your or your downstream end users' freedom gets restricted, that is a problem
- tpxl 4y ago
  You cannot run a SAAS without using the code, which makes you a user. This means SSPL restricts your freedoms as a user, intermediary or end.
  - 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
    >This means SSPL restricts your freedoms as a user, intermediary or end. doesn't AGPL force you to share you the code to customers? isn't that restricting your freedom of not sharing code?
    - tpxl 4y ago
      Every single freedom ever has restricted the 'counterfreedom'. Freedom from slavery restricts your 'freedom' to keep slaves, freedom to live restricts your 'freedom' to kill, and so forth. Perhaps I should have worded my reply differently. SSPL restricts your freedom to run the code as you wish. The AGPL does restrict your 'freedom to not share the code', but that is not one of the four software freedoms as defined by the FSF.

lmm 4y ago

> if you integrate SSPL software into your product, will it be restricted? i dont think so. That's extremely unclear. Even if it ends up being ok, there's a chilling effect.

2Gkashmiri 4y ago
https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license/faq https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license... >The copyleft condition of Section 13 of the SSPL applies only when you are offering the functionality of MongoDB, or modified versions of MongoDB, to third parties as a service. There is no copyleft condition for other SaaS applications that use MongoDB as a database. no question about it. You use it as a DB, you are clear. it only triggers when you want to serve as a SAAS
- lmm 4y ago
  That's what they claim, they're not a neutral party and other people who've looked at it say it's not so clear. The FAQ is non-binding, the license text itself is what matters.
  - 2Gkashmiri 4y ago
    https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license https://www.mongodb.com/licensing/server-side-public-license please read 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 where does it say otherwise? it starts with "if" meaning only this condition has to be applied and for nothing else
    - tpxl 4y ago
      > make the functionality [...] available [...] as a service This isn't well defined is the problem. What they obviously mean is 'don't offer MongoDB as a service', but this could easily be interpreted far more broadly. If you consider offering a complex, customizable piece of software (like Jira), where your customers can add custom fields and write custom queries, one could reasonably argue you're offering access to MongoDB under a different interface.

simiones 4y ago

Anyone developing a program is a user of that program, in the model of the GPL and the four freedoms it established.