Copyright arrangements for a web project

Bill Allombert ballombe at
Thu Dec 12 17:20:49 UTC 2013

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:44:19PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> * Personally I'm an AGPLv3 proponent.  The system ought to be suitable
>   for AGPLv3 provided that its submodules are AGPLv3-compatible (and
>   if they aren't, then we can probably write a licence exception).
>   (The main program I'm thinking of here is a Ruby on Rails
>   application.)  What are people's feelings about AGPLv3 ?

I am fine with the stated purpose of the AGPLv3, however I do not think the
actual implementation is compatible with free software.

There have been no official clarification how the AGPLv3 is supposed to work in a lot 
of situation and how it is compatible with the plain reading of the license.
Without them, I am wary of declaring the AGPL a free software license.
There is a world of difference between the actual text of the AGPLv3 and how it
is advertised.

But it is probably not the right venue to discuss the AGPLv3.


More information about the Spi-general mailing list