3 ms·
MIT gives the user the right to take away another user's rights, potentially leading to fewer rights overall. I give foobar to Alice under AGPL. Alice gives fo
by immibis 2y ago
MIT gives the user the right to take away another user's rights, potentially leading to fewer rights overall.
I give foobar to Alice under AGPL. Alice gives foobar to Bob, Carol, and Dave, under AGPL so I don't sue her.
I give barbaz to Alice. It's MIT. Alice gives barbaz to Bob, Carol and Dave under a proprietary license. I can't do anything about it, because I gave her that right.
Which scenario has more user freedom?
- jraph 2y agoSure, and I happen to agree, I release stuff under (A)GPL for exactly this reason. I guess the confusion stems from this phrasing: > If it's MIT, the person who buys it ISN'T allowed to give away more copies for free if the seller doesn't want them to I assume you meant: > If it's MIT, a seller is allowed to relicense under a proprietary license and then the buyer isn't allowed to give away copies I had understood the opposite.