3 ms·

Or SSPL, which extends AGPL with even more sharing requirements.

• aleph_minus_one 6mo ago
  The SSPL is not an open-source license.
  • cxr 6mo ago
    > It's deception, plain and simple, to claim that the software has all the benefits and promises of open source when it does not. From "The SSPL is Not an Open Source License" <https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-license https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-l...>
  • direwolf20 6mo ago
    Yes it is. It plainly meets all the criteria in the definition iff AGPL meets them too.
    • aleph_minus_one 6mo ago
      The central difference is that SSPL discriminates against specific fields of endeavor, while the AGPL doesn't; see * https://web.archive.org/web/20230411163802/https://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/2019-February/003977.html https://web.archive.org/web/20230411163802/https://lists.ope... * https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-license https://opensource.org/blog/the-sspl-is-not-an-open-source-l... * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Server_Side_Public_License&oldid=1335206483#Certification_with_OSI https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Server_Side_Publi...
      • direwolf20 6mo ago
        Which fields of endeavor? Does it say you can't use the software to run a nuclear power plant, or a military jet? Does it say you can't use it in a restaurant?
        • aleph_minus_one 6mo ago
          There are special restrictions if the software is conveyed over a network, but not for other usages, thus the SSPL discriminates against this use case.
        • deleted 6mo ago
          [deleted]