3 ms·

The AGPL also requires distribution of the modified work if used over a network, even if copies are not distributed. This is the entire reason AGPL was created

The AGPL also requires distribution of the modified work if used over a network, even if copies are not distributed. This is the entire reason AGPL was created, because GPL did not do this. > Free software is about computer USER freedom, not DEVELOPER freedom. What are non-developers going to do with source code? Back when FOSS was first conceptualized, all users were developers. Regardless of anyone's opinions on the issue, the fact of the matter is that AGPL quite specifically don't let people do "anything" with it. The software comes with obligations. That is the entire point of copyleft. Sure, you might think the obligations are good -- that doesn't mean they don't exist.

OkayPhysicist 3y ago
> What are non-developers going to do with source code? What do you do when your car is missing a feature that you want? You bring it to a mechanic, and you pay them to add the functionality you want. The GPL means freedom. And telling someone they need to respect the freedoms that you grant them is not restricting their freedom. It costs nothing to share your source code, and it should be the default state of software development. It's like the silliness around the tolerance paradox. An action that creates more freedom in the world can never be seen as "less free" than one that doesn't.
- kube-system 3y ago
  > And telling someone they need to respect the freedoms that you grant them is not restricting their freedom. It costs nothing to share your source code, and it should be the default state of software development. I agree with this. However, I don't personally believe AGPL does this as equitably as some other licenses.