Post A03fpqSQZDXeIGmG8G by markosaric@fosstodon.org
(DIR) More posts by markosaric@fosstodon.org
(DIR) Post #A03fOk5e8J5mj7CLNg by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:50:32Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
Any thoughts on the AGPL free software license?Got minimum one case of a company taking open source code and selling it as a direct, closed-source competitor. Seems fair to prevent that kind of behaviour.
(DIR) Post #A03fcmgFIbJ6oZ0rDM by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:52:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric AGPL is great! Long live the AGPL!(You'll probably want somebody critical of it to reply.)
(DIR) Post #A03fdUoFEDqjg75rn6 by brandon@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:53:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric The AGPL explicitly prohibits this from what I understand in section 5c) of the licensehttps://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.en.html#section5
(DIR) Post #A03fhDXvM33DIOEavI by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:53:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 nice! i've done some reading this weekend and it seems like the best "don't be evil" license that exists at this stage...
(DIR) Post #A03fiP8zif4xYV8jL6 by brandon@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:54:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric And section 6 decrees that source must be provided when conveying the source in object code form
(DIR) Post #A03fpqSQZDXeIGmG8G by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:55:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@brandon yeah that's how i understand it. it seems like the licence made for cloud projects and one that can prevent corporations from exploiting open source projects
(DIR) Post #A03g0Lg5LUHO19ArIm by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T16:57:26Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Douglas Crockford had a bit of an issue with a “don't be evil” license: https://wonko.com/post/jsmin-isnt-welcome-on-google-code
(DIR) Post #A03gK9WIG46S6O2NWq by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:01:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 interesting. i also like that google has an issue with AGPL so that's just another plus :)
(DIR) Post #A03hHob9Aormabkz8y by freakazoid@retro.social
2020-10-11T17:11:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric That's exactly why you should use AGPL.
(DIR) Post #A03hbZAaFIUYWxkZJQ by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:15:22Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@freakazoid makes sense. first time involved in an open source project. who would have thought larger companies would want to directly compete with us by pretty much selling our own software!
(DIR) Post #A03i3DHxC0oemANelM by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:20:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Woah, Plausible's MIT licensed‽ Generous, but you should probably change that before your next commit.
(DIR) Post #A03iFwnRoxonOKBRtQ by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:22:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 yeah, we were naive thinking there would be no corporations who would do this kind of exploitation... that's what we plan to do but was just looking for what's the best option is and AGPL seems like it so wanted to ask Mastodon first...
(DIR) Post #A03iSwgZXpEIoPAL4q by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:24:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Of course, AGPL won't stop other companies from cloning your *whole* business model (but potentially in a more tracky way); it'll only stop them hiding the source of their forks.Though a fork can still be made from any MIT-licensed version; you can't revoke that. (You *can* rewrite your repo's history so you're no longer distributing MIT-licensed versions, but that's probably not useful considering it's already out there, and has downsides for existing contributors.)
(DIR) Post #A03iyy4dv0w6Nsh5gO by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:30:43Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 i wish there were a license that goes even further in restricting what corporations could do to use your own software to compete directly against you but AGPL will do 😀 i see. i assume they'll be too lazy to use our "old" versions as it's too much work for them to get it up to where we will be in the future. if we were to rewrite the repo history, what would be the downsides for existing contributors?
(DIR) Post #A03j32fYm6CTnLu8DA by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:31:23Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric> i wish there were a license that goes even further in restricting what corporations could do to use your own software to compete directly against you but AGPL will doThere is. There are plenty. They're all non-free: freedom 0. (I assume that matters to you.)
(DIR) Post #A03j9FY5nlzHTgN6WW by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:32:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 yeah of course. we don't want to go proprietary. that's the first priority :)worrying about how corporations could take advantage of our work is a distant second
(DIR) Post #A03jB78w1cmxzFUePo by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:32:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Rewriting the history would break all their forks, and mean they had to rebase. Not everyone knows how to do that; I'd have to look it up, and crack out the command-line since Git GUI doesn't support rebase-due-to-rewritten-history (iirc).And somebody could still just use the Wayback Machine to get the commit hash, then type that into GitHub because GitHub doesn't really garbage-collect when history's rewritten in large projects.
(DIR) Post #A03jKtf904cz4dDvkm by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:34:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 ok makes sense. we don't want to cause a mess. we'll just change the license in the next few days (want to do it latest before the next big release)
(DIR) Post #A03jQIpgqV7AaLjaCW by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:35:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric You *could* make your GitHub release a feature or two behind your hosted version, and only provide the *source* of the hosted version (without the .git folder); this would allow people to self-host exactly the version you've got online, but make upgrades and forks a pain for them.I'd avoid doing this unless it's necessary to differentiate yourself from a large, active company that's encroaching on your domain.
(DIR) Post #A03jW0QQCJF7EUdOxk by Matter@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:36:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @wizzwizz4 Yeah I was a bit surprised seeing you went with MIT. AGPL is the right choice for anything that runs on a server.
(DIR) Post #A03jX1DUjxKtye4T3o by neildarlow@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:36:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric The problem with GPL-style licences is that infringers assume the author won't take them to court due to the costs involved.If you are the author (and I'm taking it that someone has lifted Plausible) then you might have to act like you will play hard-ball.To get them worried you could say that if you don't get a positive response from them, you'll go after their customers.I've seen that tactic used to good effect to pull a company into line.
(DIR) Post #A03jXaGCRtIQfAbcdU by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T17:36:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Make sure to *rebase* any unpublished commits you've worked on locally; otherwise, somebody could grab an MIT'd version before the license-change merge.You won't have released such a thing, but it'll appear as an artefact of the Git history and I don't know how well that would stand up in court.
(DIR) Post #A03jd9qzXaieVBTNNg by codewiz@mstdn.io
2020-10-11T17:38:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @freakazoid software-as-a-service such as GitLab requires the AGPL because the GPL would allow offering a competing service without sharing any changes.For anything that's client-side, I would recommend sticking with the GPLv3+ (or GPLv2+) to maximize license compatibility with other codebases.
(DIR) Post #A03k3krMZlp6nrKSOm by codewiz@mstdn.io
2020-10-11T17:42:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @freakazoid Apple does not allow distributing GPL code on the iOS appstore, and also hates the GPLv3 to the point of not upgrading GNU tools present in macOS after they switched to the GPLv3.Google is opposed to the AGPL:https://opensource.google/docs/using/agpl-policy/
(DIR) Post #A03lrN57MAZJUQz9Zg by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:03:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 we don't want to make it inconvenient for people who want to self-host Plausible. not worried about the company who already released something as i don't see them getting much traction. the main reason is to try and prevent similar behaviour from larger companies who have shown interest (they have more resources, big budgets and tens of thousands of existing customers). AGPL can at least level the playing field a bit and make it more fair so we can compete better
(DIR) Post #A03lxBl4My226nNjwe by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:04:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 ok. we don't want to make it inconvenient for people who want to self-host Plausible. not too worried about the company who already released something as i don't see them getting much traction. the main reason is to try and prevent similar behaviour from larger companies who have shown interest (they have more resources, big budgets and tens of thousands of existing customers). AGPL can at least level the playing field a bit and make it more fair so we can compete with them
(DIR) Post #A03m1cCA1GVZGAAFDE by alcinnz@floss.social
2020-10-11T18:04:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Personally I tend to favor (A)GPL, it lines up nicely with I where I draw my lines.But I don't think I can add anything beyond the other replies.
(DIR) Post #A03m5rqJmdtswryWoq by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:05:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neildarlow ok thanks, makes sense!
(DIR) Post #A03m8FLxLNYKRYuN2e by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:06:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codewiz @freakazoid exactly! definitely makes sense for a software as a service like us
(DIR) Post #A03mUJ9rsSj0cDm27s by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:08:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@codewiz @freakazoid the fact that google is opposed to the AGPL, makes it an even better sounding option for me 😀
(DIR) Post #A03njyt374r2KgwbXU by skyfaller@jawns.club
2020-10-11T18:24:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I believe the AGPL is the best open source license currently available.I intend to use it for all software I produce. I believe it is best to use the AGPL even for client-side software, because you never know when someone might find a way to serve up your software without users downloading copies. Imagine Google Stadia + Chromebooks, and people going back to thin clients due to some future technological developments.
(DIR) Post #A03o1z9ypvVOONRsrw by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:27:19Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @wizzwizz4 Those that tried to go too far (vs corps) where generally pruned as being non-free (FSF) anymore and in most cases, non-open-source.But then again Bruce Perens left OSI because it was accepting weirder licences. Everyone is against Amazon (mongodb, etc.)...
(DIR) Post #A03o8HcV7E3BNlnATA by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:28:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric That seems like a consequence of the Four Freedoms; Richard Stallman, of all people, is not going to make changes to his philosophy to protect corporations.
(DIR) Post #A03oDqyP6HZ0Tbh20W by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:29:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 @markosaric Although now I believe it's also out of Stallman's hands too...
(DIR) Post #A03oNLIbid6V8XfT8K by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:31:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@skyfaller makes sense, thanks for sharing!
(DIR) Post #A03ogS1uuyrLVvyN8a by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:34:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric Well, kind of. He's stepped down as leader of the FSF, mostly because he's not good enough at acting to be a good-for-PR “face of an organisation” and people were exploiting that, but he's still chief GNUisance and will get in their way if they go far wrong.
(DIR) Post #A03p6450aQtUlNdGQS by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:39:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @wizzwizz4 i wonder why that is so (i understand corporations are against it but it doesn't seem like they necessary have the best interest of foss). i just read briefly about the mongodb case yesterday and it seemed like they had valid reasons to try and figure out a different licence. all the current licences were written too long time ago so they're not considering cloud and software as a service as much as they should with it being the main way to distribute software these days
(DIR) Post #A03p9tJOZ0DuWdBbFo by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:39:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @waglo Apart from the AGPL.
(DIR) Post #A03pPsqI4oN5hdCMc4 by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:42:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Agreed, GPL is more for desktop software, as it was designed decades ago.Affero (AGPL) was the stop-gap measure, but its also strange since the licences first depend on copyright laws, and those laws only impact copy (doh!) and not use itself.It's a really complicated matter. Add to that the fact that licenses are there to lower friction.Nobody remembers FSF was funded by Stallman _selling_ emacs on tape :-)@wizzwizz4
(DIR) Post #A03pZd1VkKEVXL5qxU by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:44:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 @markosaric I was working on the mastodon ancester, StatusNet, and that was AGPL 10-15 years ago:https://github.com/zcopley/StatusNetI like #AGPL :-)
(DIR) Post #A03pa8xN1Fw0ZlOzwm by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:44:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 @waglo yeah that's how we ended up focusing on AGPL as it's the only relevant option reallyafter we do make the change, i'll report back if we encounter any loopholes with it
(DIR) Post #A03ph6rHDdkO5xsEQS by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:45:51Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric One known loophole is that 3rd parties are required to publish changes - but they don't strictly have to upstream them...@wizzwizz4
(DIR) Post #A03phNUVNYdJgGLmnA by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:46:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric Technically, the GPL is combined copyright / EULA. (ish.) The Affero clause is the same *kind* of clause as the “share source if you shared binaries”.
(DIR) Post #A03plG4ysSPjqtGIy0 by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:46:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric But you're allowed to upstream them if they're published under the AGPL, so it's almost entirely fine.
(DIR) Post #A03pmLBLOKJXy1kpge by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:47:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 Correct,which makes it kind of an oddball license...@markosaric
(DIR) Post #A03ps8Jw7fUzodXGQC by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:48:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric All free licenses are odd. They're a total abuse of copyright law.
(DIR) Post #A03pupCxdg9DPMYYEa by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:48:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @wizzwizz4 ok thanks for sharing! this thread was very useful to me. we'll go ahead with the change, i'll prepare a blog post for the announcement and then we'll keep an eye and share any learnings in the future
(DIR) Post #A03pvJqhiTlQRJNiLY by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:48:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 Just don't expect (amazon's) cooperation to merge their changes to your code...@markosaric
(DIR) Post #A03qBLHIAi3TVKST9U by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:51:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric If they're happy to fork, that's on them. They shouldn't expect your co-operation merging your changes.
(DIR) Post #A03qDJ9j24UbVBr9IO by wizzwizz4@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T18:51:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@waglo @markosaric If they're happy to fork, that's on them. They shouldn't expect your co-operation merging your changes, and you don't need to go out of your way not to specifically do things in a way that break their patches.
(DIR) Post #A03qKiVDC1PS8kRI0m by waglo@mastodon.fedi.quebec
2020-10-11T18:53:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@wizzwizz4 They might be odd, but they're what makes us even 🙂 @markosaric
(DIR) Post #A041kMVCi6ZAvtrnEm by neildarlow@fosstodon.org
2020-10-11T21:00:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I should add that a company in your position has a problem with licensing.A license can protect your rights to the code (and the rights of others that use it) but the license might not extend to the effect of the software.If the software's effect is to provide a service and you've GPL'd the software there's a point that it's legal for a user to sell the service the software provides.You could provide additional closed-source benefits to your - 1/2
(DIR) Post #A04MB98qUVMyOiSS6y by federico3@mastodon.social
2020-10-12T00:49:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @wizzwizz4 Interesting discussions around ethical aspects in licensing at #copyleftconf https://2020.copyleftconf.org/video
(DIR) Post #A04MPv9YmYDDMBpxOi by adfeno@ecodigital.social
2020-10-12T00:52:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Use latest #AGPL with “or-later”, there are pundits who could take an installable image editor and turn it into a service as a software substitute.Perhaps the only exception, favoring #GPL, would be when making #WebExtension to replace something in a webpage you don't control.
(DIR) Post #A04hkBCGwJSlwdbhIm by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T04:51:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neildarlow ok, we'll have to think of something if even the AGPL doesn't prevent these issues
(DIR) Post #A04hswVsu0nB0hxWl6 by ivan@vucica.net
2020-10-11T21:06:25.791709Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric AGPL confuses me. I can approximately understand GPL2/3, but AGPL, how far does the virality go? Which ones of the backends and frontends need to be opened when only one of the components in the stack if AGPL (but the rest is making network calls to it)?I’ve better things to spend my time on than to worry about it, but it does concern me enough that I minimize my use of AGPL’d software. And I don’t integrate it into stuff I build. And I don’t think I would use it in a business, if I’d start one.I mean:Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, if you modify the Program, your modified version must prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely through a computer network (if your version supports such interaction) an opportunity to receive the Corresponding Source of your version by providing access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge, through some standard or customary means of facilitating copying of software. This Corresponding Source shall include the Corresponding Source for any work covered by version 3 of the GNU General Public License that is incorporated pursuant to the following paragraph.Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed under version 3 of the GNU General Public License into a single combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work, but the work with which it is combined will remain governed by version 3 of the GNU General Public License.plusA compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an “aggregate” if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation’s users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate.If the user accesses a frontend, and the frontend accesses a key-value store, does the user interact with the key-value store? And are the frontend + key-value store actually a single ‘combined work’? A single, as it says, “larger program”?What if you put them into a single Docker image?I am not sufficiently a lawyer to figure that out.
(DIR) Post #A04hsyKc8sxueKhYTA by ivan@vucica.net
2020-10-11T21:08:13.878413Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I feel like I'm FUDing now, but I am genuinely concerned about how to interpret AGPL.
(DIR) Post #A04ht06VYIs09A7JlA by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T04:53:07Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ivan we don't really have these concerns. we're a standalone app, not a library or something like that. we're also not looking to be used / sponsored by large corporations that have issues with AGPL because they don't want to go open source
(DIR) Post #A04i98PCSI0KWiYMjI by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T04:56:08Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@federico3 @wizzwizz4 thanks! anything specific i should know / watch? a lot of videos there and i'm about to start writing a post to announce this so cannot watch it all :)
(DIR) Post #A04iO0UOAbzWJo4Wp6 by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T04:58:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@adfeno thanks! what difference does the "or later" do? any example of someone using it?
(DIR) Post #A04udmbYl5HvL9iOx6 by uniq@chaos.social
2020-10-12T07:16:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I'm surprised to read that you didn't use AGPL from the start. I'm pretty sure it's a better choice for your company than MIT.If you're not familiar with #NextCloud business strategies you might be interested in this podcast: https://librelounge.org/episodes/32-companies-money-and-society-with-frank-karlitschek.htmlFrank explains how he chose a business model fir maximizing user freedom and what risks he identified with his approach. So far AGPL seems to work fine for NextCloud. :)
(DIR) Post #A04um9U3ZwfQcBCEoS by uniq@chaos.social
2020-10-12T07:17:32Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I'm surprised to read that you didn't use AGPL from the start. I'm pretty sure it's a better choice for your company than MIT.If you're not familiar with #NextCloud business strategies you might be interested in this podcast: https://librelounge.org/episodes/32-companies-money-and-society-with-frank-karlitschek.htmlFrank explains how he chose a business model for maximizing user freedom and what risks he identified with his approach. So far AGPL seems to work fine for NextCloud. :)#LibreLounge
(DIR) Post #A04ur4s29s4XkrlC1w by uniq@chaos.social
2020-10-12T07:18:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I'm surprised to read that you didn't use #AGPL from the start. I'm pretty sure it's a better choice for your company than #MIT.If you're not familiar with #NextCloud business strategies you might be interested in this podcast: https://librelounge.org/episodes/32-companies-money-and-society-with-frank-karlitschek.htmlFrank explains how he chose a business model for maximizing user freedom and what risks he identified with his approach. So far AGPL seems to work fine for NextCloud. :)#LibreLounge
(DIR) Post #A04vngnPJJdAArXoLQ by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T07:29:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@uniq thanks for sharing, will listen!
(DIR) Post #A04xnwCwD42ZshjT5E by neildarlow@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T07:51:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric You could gain the advantage in your marketing.Make much of being the creators of Plausible and offer a "Privacy Pledge".Emphasise that you offer top-tier support for Plausible that your imitators can't.You'll have to win this battle through information. Getting your website at the top of "privacy-respecting web analytics" searches will help too. You're in the best position to achieve that.In short, play the marketplace.
(DIR) Post #A050iM3pTXHQBjV8tM by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T08:23:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@neildarlow for sure!
(DIR) Post #A05VbJum9Y8c5IONMG by ivan@vucica.net
2020-10-12T13:34:10.205122Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric we’re also not looking to be used / sponsored by large corporations that have issues with AGPL because they don’t want to go open sourceI’m not sharing my concerns from PoV of a large corporation (I’m too small a peon to do so), but as a possible entrepreneur some day in the ~distant future. Yes, I’m running Pleroma which is AGPL, but I’m not really integrating it with anything, and I’m only hosting it for myself. Even for Pleroma, though, I’m wondering: because the configuration seems to get compiled into it (anytime I change the config, there’s a rebuild), this constitutes a modification of Pleroma. Do random strangers making network requests to my instance — instance owners, random visitors — have a right to request my database config?AGPL is super strange. I want something that protects my libre work similar to AGPL’s intentions. But I’m not sure AGPL itself is great.
(DIR) Post #A05VbKJwdyGrLMATaa by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-12T14:10:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ivan i think it's the best license that exists currently that tries to protect the open sources projects in the cloud. there are no alternatives actually so it's the only one. as long as you don't distribute something as a service in the cloud, there's really no difference to the GPL... but it does help projects like ours in case someone wants to sell something based on our work
(DIR) Post #A05mhYdy0EHMiv5dxo by freakazoid@retro.social
2020-10-12T17:21:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric @codewiz Yeah one couldn't ask for a stronger endorsement of GPLv3 and AGPL.
(DIR) Post #A07ON9W9hZ8wQB5ql6 by irl@hackers.town
2020-10-13T11:58:37Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Did you decide to go with AGPL? That's actually going to push me to use something else if that's the case.
(DIR) Post #A07OXRbtHyorQigRH6 by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T12:00:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irl yep, here's the announcement. what's your concern with it? https://plausible.io/blog/open-source-licenses
(DIR) Post #A07OoRtNUf4lEAyHrc by irl@hackers.town
2020-10-13T12:03:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric It's a viral license with conditions that I don't have the money to pay a lawyer to make sure I'm complying with. It's fine if you want that to be your thing, but it's not something I want to be a part of.
(DIR) Post #A07PrazOEAmuGRqcUK by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T12:15:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irl the license change doesn't impact anyone on our subscription plans whatsoever. it only affects those who want to take our code from github and resell Plasuible to their customers without open sourcing their changes
(DIR) Post #A07Q4weR040bDEPZmS by irl@hackers.town
2020-10-13T12:17:48Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I'm probably in a better position to decide if it affects me than you. You've made a big point about how the threat of forking keeps you honest, and this prevents you from being evil. Having an MIT licensed product and equipped with GDPR data portability rights, if you become evil I can take the software and run it myself and just move my data across. You've removed that option and therefore have had a negative impact on the service. I could go dig into the relevant consumer rights legislation, or you could just tell me where I can get a refund.
(DIR) Post #A07SXht7AUFnjP7X4C by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T12:45:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@irl sure. do reach out. thanks! https://plausible.io/contact
(DIR) Post #A07g0MdoXbMhdaxWHQ by optikfluffel@social.fluffel.io
2020-10-13T15:07:18.014721Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric Now I'd need a lawyer to use your software. This makes me a little sad tbh..
(DIR) Post #A07g0MpVq6isDsQrVw by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T15:15:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@optikfluffel why? nothing changes for subscribers or for self-hosters. it only affects corporations that want to resell Plausible without making their changes open source
(DIR) Post #A07hUcYc1tvbdsW8J6 by optikfluffel@social.fluffel.io
2020-10-13T15:21:53.386115Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric the License itself is more than enough (for a single coder like me at least). I don't understand half of what's in the AGPL text so I simply can't estimate the risks involved when using Plausible now (with something that's not open source).
(DIR) Post #A07hUcyUTgd0w8cndw by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T15:32:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@optikfluffel there are no risks really.it really is the only license that helps us prevent from being abused by large corporations who plan to take our code and resell it to their large audiences and not contribute to open source or to our project. this was not a theoretical threat but an actual threat that we had to act on in order to keep being able to run this project
(DIR) Post #A07iWqIK1evqmTWLku by optikfluffel@social.fluffel.io
2020-10-13T15:41:24.904328Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric I get it, but AGPL also scares a lot of small businesses and freelancers that don't want to or can't get a lawyer to be sure they're complying with AGPL. Some examples:
- Is tweaking the JS part, writing a new one or rewriting it in WASM enough, so that I have to open source my whole webapp now?
- If I change parts of the Plausible backend to maybe report things from my own Phoenix app, do I have to open source the whole thing, only the changes?
And there are a lot more of these..
(DIR) Post #A07iWqlOHaBUEd7Z44 by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T15:44:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@optikfluffel agpl is the same as gpl license just works for the cloud too. i guess you're against gpl then too? there don't seem to be any licenses other than agpl that help modern foss projects in the cloud.in general the rule is don't worry about it unless you plan to resell it and don't want to open source your modifications
(DIR) Post #A07joQymz8b9QzKvxY by optikfluffel@social.fluffel.io
2020-10-13T15:52:34.123662Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric "don't worry about it" doesn't help me in front a court, I'm sorry..And yes, I don't like GPL as well, for the same reasons. It's fine if what you're working on is open source anyway, but for everything that's not I wouldn't touch "viral" licensed stuff at all. I can't predict the implications of what has to be open sourced and when or even if I'm breaking what agreements.
(DIR) Post #A07joSL9vS5PeeoJSy by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-13T15:58:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@optikfluffel permissive license opens us up to exploitation, (A)GPL doesn't impact anyone other than those that want to exploit us. i don't know any other solution unfortunately. i do know for sure that we don't want corporation to take advantage of us
(DIR) Post #A0FhmKQmX6mL3zwDWi by adfeno@ecodigital.social
2020-10-17T12:13:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@markosaric “or-later” makes sure that the end-user has the right to upgrade to later versions of the same license if an adaptation is made by the end-user. This is important to make sure that improved versions of the license catchup with the older projects.
(DIR) Post #A0G4Hgy0zbHKvUqKCe by markosaric@fosstodon.org
2020-10-17T16:25:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@adfeno thanks we've changed to agpl or later now