On 17/6/24 00:08, Dirk Riehle wrote:
Thanks for the answer.
>> Is there any recognized published statement that explains whether the
>> AGPL achieves a network copyleft effect as intended or not? And if the
>> conclusion is that it doesn't what's the alternative if you want this
>> effect?
>
> AGPL doesn't intend a "network effect" — at least not as VCs would see
> it —indeed as a copyleft license it's intended to prevent this.
This is the news for me. For the longest time, the AGPL was positioned
as a network ("cloud") copyleft license.
Do you have any pointers as the original intentions not being that?
We are perhaps speaking at crossed purposes.
I read your question as being about network effects in the usual sense
of the demand-side equivalent of an economy of scale, of interest to
for-profit entities because it drives vendor lock-in, which is very much
what SSPL adopters are looking for. The idea of freedom seems marvellous
to them when it looks like free programmer labour, but disastrous when
it looks like for-profit competitors.
On re-reading, I suspect that you actually mean something like copyleft
freedoms arising for users who access remotely (i.e. simply via a
communication network, not in reference to economic network effects at
all) software licensed to the remote operator under AGPL. There is so
far as I am aware no serious controversy here. Not only does AGPL have
this effect, several vendors have switched to SSPL specifically to
escape it. Once they understand what freedom actually means, they want
nothing to do with it.
I am wondering however whether I've still not really understood your
question. It might be helpful for you to spell out what it is that
you're trying to achieve, particularly including precisely what copyleft
effects you have in mind. Relying instead on "effect as intended" or any
other reference to definitions or history documented elsewhere requires
that the reader understand what it is that you understood to be the
intentions of the people who drafted AGPL, which is somewhat ambiguous
at best.
- Roland
_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not
necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the
Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.
License-discuss mailing list
License-discuss@lists.opensource.org
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
