3 ms·
> > This makes it clear that they intent to ship under some alternative license, for a fee. > It makes it clear they intend to ship under the AGPLv3 The blog
by KajMagnus 3y ago
> > This makes it clear that they intent to ship under some alternative license, for a fee.
> It makes it clear they intend to ship under the AGPLv3
The blog post says literally:
"or by contacting Element for an alternative license."
So, that's what's on their mind. And that's for a fee [1].
(Not saying anyone is doing anything wrong — I'm using AGPL myself for some software I'm developing, + a CLA.)
[1] See this comment below: "The reason for the CLA is purely to allow us to sell AGPL exceptions", https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38181368 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38181368
- camgunz 3y agoYou're missing the point. I'm saying people are getting super exercised about the "we might sell alternative licenses", but the code's AGPLv3, which everyone should be fine with.