AGPL License
en.wikipedia.org
AGPL License
1–10 of 111 posts
Re: AGPL License
#2Copyleft, and AGPL specifically, seems like a good fit for large applications, whereas more permissive licenses work well for smaller libraries.
Re: AGPL License
#3Copyleft, and AGPL specifically, seems like a good fit for large applications, whereas more permissive licenses work well for smaller libraries.
Using more permissive licenses for smaller programs is what the FSF recommend:
"It is not worth the trouble to use copyleft for most small programs. We use 300 lines as our benchmark: when a software package's source code is shorter than that, the benefits provided by copyleft are usually too small to justify the inconvenience of making sure a copy of the license always accompanies the software."
[0] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html#sm...
Re: AGPL License
#4Copyleft, and AGPL specifically, seems like a good fit for large applications, whereas more permissive licenses work well for smaller libraries.
I specifically use it because while I'm committed to writing free (as in freedom software), my downstream users may not be. I'd rather they didn't have more options than I do if they decide to compete against me. Free software empowers the downstream user, so I kind of think of it a bit like surfing. You potentially have all this extra energy, but that energy can crush you if you don't walk a very tight line. As the upstream author you have a bit of an advantage, but it's easy to squander it if you don't think carefully about what you are doing. I'm always a bit perplexed when people write free software but intentionally avoid copyleft. There are lots of places where permissive licenses are the right way to go, but also a lot of places where your are just creating an uneven playing field with yourself in the worst position.
Re: AGPL License
#5I've always wondered about whether the AGPL is a good fit for software that isn't accessed over the network. At first glance this would appear to offer the exact same rights as the GPL in this scenario, however you then have the protection of the AGPL if the software was ever incorporated into a networked program.
Does anyone have any experience with this? Are there pitfalls to using the AGPL for a regular program that I'm not thinking of?
Re: AGPL License
#6Google does not allow usage of AGPL code.
Re: AGPL License
#7I've always wondered about whether the AGPL is a good fit for software that isn't accessed over the network. At first glance this would appear to offer the exact same rights as the GPL in this scenario, however you then have the protection of the AGPL if the software was ever incorporated into a networked program. Does anyone have any experience with this? Are there pitfalls to using the AGPL for a regular program th…
I recently used the iText Library for PDF parsing in java.
Everything was alright until I discovered their AGPL license.
https://itextpdf.com/en/how-buy/agpl-license
Since our product was proprietary, we had to remove the library since our product would also come under the AGPL license or we would have to buy their commercial version, for which we can get a "quote"(https://itextpdf.com/en/how-buy)
Re: AGPL License
#8I've always wondered about whether the AGPL is a good fit for software that isn't accessed over the network. At first glance this would appear to offer the exact same rights as the GPL in this scenario, however you then have the protection of the AGPL if the software was ever incorporated into a networked program. Does anyone have any experience with this? Are there pitfalls to using the AGPL for a regular program th…
I recently used the iText Library for PDF parsing in java. Everything was alright until I discovered their AGPL license. https://itextpdf.com/en/how-buy/agpl-license Since our product was proprietary, we had to remove the library since our product would also come under the AGPL license or we would have to buy their commercial version, for which we can get a "quote"( https://itextpdf.com/en/how-buy )
What did you replace it with?
Why wouldn't iText deserve your money if you were using it in your commercial product?
Re: AGPL License
#9Copyleft, and AGPL specifically, seems like a good fit for large applications, whereas more permissive licenses work well for smaller libraries.
I specifically use it because while I'm committed to writing free (as in freedom software), my downstream users may not be. I'd rather they didn't have more options than I do if they decide to compete against me. Free software empowers the downstream user, so I kind of think of it a bit like surfing. You potentially have all this extra energy, but that energy can crush you if you don't walk a very tight line. As the…
For a lot of people, free software is about collaboration, not competition.
Re: AGPL License
#10I've always wondered about whether the AGPL is a good fit for software that isn't accessed over the network. At first glance this would appear to offer the exact same rights as the GPL in this scenario, however you then have the protection of the AGPL if the software was ever incorporated into a networked program. Does anyone have any experience with this? Are there pitfalls to using the AGPL for a regular program th…
A potential pitfall is that only AGPLv3 and GPLv3 are directly compatible (in the sense of producing programs created from both AGPLv3 and GPLv3 code without violating either license). That's not possible with GPLv2 or AGPLv1 in any combination, and there's still some code-bases that will be GPLv2 forever.
But if that's not a concern then I would agree that AGPL is exactly how the GPL should look like in the age of SaaS, PaaS and all the other ?aaS.