Skip to Content
Last modified by chrisby on 2025/01/11 10:03
From version 2.115
edited by chrisby
on 2025/01/08 13:40
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 2.107
edited by chrisby
on 2025/01/08 13:28
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -47,11 +47,14 @@
47 47  
48 48  **Copyleft Licenses**
49 49  
50 -To address problems with proprietary software, the FSF promotes copyleft licenses, like the AGPL license, which require that any derivative works remain under the same license. The notion of “derivative work” is somewhat vague in legal terms, but a common interpretation is that software depending on AGPL code to function is a derivative work.
50 +To address the problems with proprietary software, the FSF primarily promotes copyleft licenses, which require that any derivative works of the software be licensed under the same terms as the original code. The term "derivative work" is legally somewhat vague, but here is a common understanding is: If the AGPL code is essential for the software to work, then the software is considered a derivative product. For example:
51 51  
52 -For instance, if a project directly incorporates AGPL source code or relies on an AGPL library, it must adopt the AGPL license for its entire codebase. Similarly, when software calls an external AGPL service over a network, the software is typically not a derivative work if that service is purely optional. However, if the service is essential and the software won’t function without it, even if the AGPL code is hosted externally, the software is still considered a derivative work. Attempting to “bypass” the AGPL by outsourcing essential functions in a network service will not avoid the license requirements.
52 +* When a software needs AGPL source code directly its a derivate work. that means using a AGPL licensed library or directly AGPL code into the project makes it a proprietary product.
53 +* Another is when a software uses an external AGPL service via network.
54 + * If the AGPL service is not essential and an optional extension to the software, then it not considered a derivative work.
55 + * If the AGPL service is an essential or even a mandatry part of the software, then it is considered a derivative work. For example, A vendor could come up with the idea to use AGPL code for his propieatary software, but out sources it into a s seaprate service assessible via network, so his proprietary software does not need the AGPL code directly, but does not work without it either. The proprietary software is closely coupled to the AGPL code. This attempt to circumvent the AGPL is prevented thorugh the license as this is consider.
53 53  
54 -In summary, this copyleft license ensures that whenever AGPL code is reused, or when contributions are made to existing copyleft code, the resulting work must remain open source. Athe  also guarantees that the source code is available so users can modify, build, and control the software themselves.
57 +This ensures that when contributions are made to a copyleft project, or when copyleft code is directly reused in another project, the resulting work must be released under the same copyleft license. This prevents vendors from incorporating copyleft code into proprietary products, and ensures that any derivative works remain open source. In addition, copyleft licenses require that the source code be made available to users so that they can modify, build, and control the software themselves.
55 55  
56 56  **License Preferences**
57 57