Why I have trouble trusting FSF

Posted Aug 11, 2011 8:18 UTC (Thu) by AlexHudson (guest, #41828)
In reply to: Why I have trouble trusting FSF by ballombe
Parent article: Desktop Summit: Copyright assignments

I don't think it does either. I've never read it as requiring the developer to put in place such a feature; it only talks about the feature if it's present.

Similarly, using a reverse proxy to circumvent the license restriction is pretty obviously an infringement of copyright. I can't think of many circumstances where a court would fail to treat that the same as stripping the feature out, because that's what you're doing. The technical means to achieve that are totally irrelevant.

Why I have trouble trusting FSF

Posted Aug 11, 2011 12:22 UTC (Thu) by gidoca (subscriber, #62438) [Link] (3 responses)

> I've never read it as requiring the developer to put in place such a feature; it only talks about the feature if it's present.
I wonder what this means with respect to the AGPL-licenced iText library. The terms of use page (http://www.itextpdf.com/terms-of-use/index.php) seems to imply that you have to provide the source code of a web application that uses iText, but I don't think the AGPL requires this.

Why I have trouble trusting FSF

Posted Aug 11, 2011 14:25 UTC (Thu) by davide.del.vento (guest, #59196) [Link] (2 responses)

That's the whole point of AGPL!!

If you use my AGPL source code into your application, even if you do not distribute it in the "traditional" sense (but have users using it "remotely, e.g. as a web application), then you *must* provide the whole source code that it's running. If it's just mine, fine, but if you made any modification, or if you linked anything else that was yours, you have to provide that too.

Why I have trouble trusting FSF

Posted Aug 11, 2011 15:40 UTC (Thu) by gidoca (subscriber, #62438) [Link]

Ah, it seems like there is a difference between version 1 and 3 of the AGPL. Version 1 only requires that "if, in the version you received, any user interacting with the Program was given the opportunity to request transmission to that user of the Program's complete source code, you must not remove that facility [...]"; this was what I had in mind. However, version 3 does indeed require the code of any derived software to be shared when "offering access from a designated place".

Why I have trouble trusting FSF

Posted Aug 13, 2011 5:02 UTC (Sat) by dberlin (subscriber, #24694) [Link]

Again, this is not correct.
The AGPLv3 *only* requires you distribute source to users interacting over a network if you modify the program.