8 ms·
I am not sure how to interpret what you have written. Are you suggesting Amazon operated and sold AGPL-licenses software, and thus made a licensed program avail
by xyzzy_plugh 2y ago
I am not sure how to interpret what you have written. Are you suggesting Amazon operated and sold AGPL-licenses software, and thus made a licensed program available over the network, but did not comply with the terms of the license? I am not aware of any evidence of such.
- satvikpendem 2y agoAmazon repackaged MongoDB, an originally AGPL licensed work, and did indeed comply with AGPL, but that means nothing because they did not modify the source code at all, they merely packaged it up into a hosted service. Because they followed the terms of the license but were accused of "leeching off" of MongoDB, even though they clearly licensed it to be used as such, MongoDB then changed their license to a source available one. My point is that if Amazon's lawyers, which are likely better and stronger than most anyone here on HN's, approved such actions with regards to AGPL works, then it's very likely that they were within their rights to do so via the terms of AGPL without open sourcing their integrations too.
- xyzzy_plugh 2y agoWhat evidence is there that they repackaged MongoDB? How did they "comply" with the AGPL? It seems like they reimplemented it which would be no AGPL licensed works are involved. This sounds like a myth. There is no way AWS legal would allow providing access to an AGPL licensed work over the network.