3 ms·
If the SSPL is more aggressive than the AGPL why don't companies just adopt the AGPL. This is an honest question. I'm familiar with the AGPL but not with the SS
by weinzierl 3y ago
If the SSPL is more aggressive than the AGPL why don't companies just adopt the AGPL. This is an honest question. I'm familiar with the AGPL but not with the SSPL and wondered before, why the AGPL is used so rarely.
- redwood 3y agoBecause the AGPL left more ambiguous the scenarios where the user would be compelled the open source their work that used the AGPL licensed work: this unfortunately led many people and organizations to rule out the use of a AGPL software. Google and Amazon in particular are known to have these carte blanch rules in place. While an open source maximalist might be happy with that ambiguity, if it impedes the use of the software and hence the chance that a broader community of open source will thrive, it arguably backfires... SSPL aims to make explicitly clear that it is in context of building a public service for the software that the copy left provisions of an expectation of open sourcing occur. The theory is that this allows the software to be more widely used and for the community to benefit when a public service open source project is maintained
- bawolff 3y agoThe goal of these license changes is to prevent people from selling Redis as a service essentially, in order to prevent them competing with the redis company's offerings. If it was AGPL, you would still be allowed to do that.
- blueelephanttea 3y agoMongoDB was AGPL. They decided it was not sufficient to prevent an Amazon hosted MongoDB offering so they went down the path of SSPL.