Skip to Content
Last modified by chrisby on 2025/01/11 10:03
From version 2.87
edited by chrisby
on 2025/01/08 11:21
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 2.127
edited by chrisby
on 2025/01/11 09:59
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -47,11 +47,15 @@
47 47  
48 48  **Copyleft Licenses**
49 49  
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 a common understanding is that it means a new work based on the original copyleft code that incorporates it at the source level. 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.
50 +To address problems with proprietary software, the FSF promotes copyleft licenses, such as the AGPL, which require that any derivative works remain under the same license. This approach ensures that the freedom to use, modify, and redistribute the software is preserved for everyone. The principle behind these licenses is that if you benefit from open source software, you should contribute back by sharing any improvements with the community, thus protecting the collaborative nature of free software.
51 51  
52 +The term "derivative work" is somewhat vague in legal terms, but a common interpretation is that software that depends on AGPL code to function is a derivative work. For example, if a project directly incorporates AGPL source code or relies on an AGPL library, it must adopt the AGPL license for its entire code base. Similarly, if software calls an external AGPL service over a network and the service is purely optional, the software is not considered a derivative work. However, if the service is essential and the software won't work without it, even if the AGPL code is hosted externally, the software is still considered a derivative work. Therefore, attempting to "work around" the AGPL by outsourcing essential functions in a network service will not avoid the license requirements.
53 +
54 +In summary, copyleft licenses like the AGPL ensure that whenever code is reused or contributions are made to existing code, the resulting work must remain open source. These licenses also require that the source code be made available upon request, so that users can modify, build, and control the software themselves if they wish.
55 +
52 52  **License Preferences**
53 53  
54 -The OSI aims to maximize the contributions and impact of open source by being open to all open source licenses. Permissive licenses have become very popular in recent years, especially in commercial contexts, but the OSI is open to choosing copyleft licenses if developers want to ensure that derivative works remain open and free. The FSF, on the other hand, tolerates all open source licenses, but has a strong preference for copyleft licenses, believing that all software should be protected in this way.
58 +The OSI aims to maximize the contributions and impact of open source by being neutral and open to all licenses that meet the open source definition, whether permissive or copyleft. The FSF accepts all open source licenses, but has a strong preference for copyleft licenses.
55 55  
56 56  **User Behavior**
57 57  
... ... @@ -65,8 +65,8 @@
65 65  
66 66  **Does a permissive or copyleft project lead to more contributions?**
67 67  
68 -* Permissive licenses might attract more users, especially vendors, and lead to more voluntary contributions. Copyleft licenses, on the other hand, might repel some of them, but force improvements to be open-sourced and shared with the community. Which effect is greater depends on the situation.
72 +* Permissive licenses might attract more users, especially vendors, and lead to more voluntary contributions. Copyleft licenses, on the other hand, might repel some contributors, but force improvements to be open-sourced and shared with the community. Which effect is greater depends on the situation.
69 69  
70 -**Why should people with no technical expertise care about open source? Speaking of people who cannot even read the source code.**
74 +**Why should people with no technical expertise care about open source?**
71 71  
72 -* Even if you do not have the expertise to examine or modify the source code yourself, open source software allows you to hire specialists to adapt the software to your needs. The main benefits are the protection of personal data or intellectual property and reduced dependency on a single vendor. Therefore, from a purely profit-driven perspective, choosing open source may be the more economical option.
76 +* Even if you do not have the expertise to examine or modify the source code yourself, open source software allows you to hire developers to adapt the software to your needs. The main benefits are the protection of personal data or intellectual property and reduced dependency on a single vendor. Therefore, from a purely profit-driven perspective, choosing open source may be the more economical option.