1 |
Ulrich Mueller posted on Tue, 04 Nov 2014 12:51:54 +0100 as excerpted: |
2 |
|
3 |
>>>>>> On Tue, 04 Nov 2014, Luca Barbato wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> - use AGPLv3 + as many exceptions as you like if you want something |
6 |
>> special, who doesn't agree with them has to stay with the vanilla agpl3 |
7 |
>> with all its forced "freedom". |
8 |
> |
9 |
> I disagree. AGPL-3 only makes sense for programs that directly interact |
10 |
> with users via a web server or similar. Using it for other packages can |
11 |
> lead to awkward situations. (If you want an example, we're currently |
12 |
> bitten by Oracle's inappropriate use of AGPL-3 for sys-libs/db:6.0 [1].) |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Ulrich |
15 |
> |
16 |
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=525110 |
17 |
|
18 |
I think that was the intention. |
19 |
|
20 |
The suggestion was that if you want a lot of otherwise custom |
21 |
restrictions, to avoid license proliferation start with something like |
22 |
the AGPLv3+ that's recognized as a standard free license but ends up |
23 |
being impractical for many, and then add further liberating exceptions as |
24 |
you like. Because the AGPLv3 is a recognized standard free license even |
25 |
if restricted for many in practice, and the exceptions only add |
26 |
additional freedoms, anyone who doesn't like them or doesn't want to |
27 |
legally review them can take the already well reviewed AGPLv3 only, while |
28 |
the exceptions do reduce the normal restrictions of the AGPLv3 in certain |
29 |
additional areas, for those who want/need them. |
30 |
|
31 |
Because the AGPLv3 is already both lawyer reviewed and accepted as a |
32 |
standard free license, that'll solve several issues at once, being |
33 |
unlikely to have the loopholes or internal conflicts that layman-created |
34 |
licenses without sufficient lawyer review often have, being accepted as a |
35 |
standard free license, allowing distros to do their distro thing without |
36 |
too much additional hassle because it's a license they're familiar with, |
37 |
etc. But at the same time it's restrictive enough that it tends to |
38 |
prevent a lot of code sharing, like the custom license alternative it |
39 |
replaces, and a license exception can be fashioned to encourage |
40 |
distribution of patches as separate tarballs, etc, as necessary. |
41 |
Assuming there's a proprietary license available for those wishing to |
42 |
purchase it and be freed of the restrictions otherwise imposed by the |
43 |
AGPLv3, the choice of AGPLv3 for those not choosing to purchase the |
44 |
proprietary license may be seen as appropriate indeed. |
45 |
|
46 |
And given Oracle's history of deliberate choice of incompatible licenses |
47 |
in other areas I strongly suspect the "inappropriate choice" of the AGPLv3 |
48 |
in this area was deliberate obstructionism as well. IOW, given Oracle's |
49 |
goals, they very likely see the AGPLv3 as an /entirely/ appropriate |
50 |
choice for this product, as evidenced by their active enforcement |
51 |
activities. Who care's about the unpaid user? Certainly Oracle doesn't |
52 |
seem too much concerned about inconveniencing them. They're unpaid and |
53 |
thus generate no revenue, after all! |
54 |
|
55 |
-- |
56 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
57 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
58 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |