2024-12-08 ┃ edited ┃ RE: marcan
Practical AGPL reminder: You are safe as long as you do not contribute to or modify AGPLed software, and as long as you don't use Gentoo or other source-based distros. As long as you follow those rules, you can install and use and serve over the network AGPLed software without fear of violating that broken license, and you don't have to care about the existence or lack thereof of a source offer mechanism, since you aren't touching the code yourself.
Most distros that ship AGPLed software as pre-built packages probably violate the AGPL themselves, but that's not your problem, it's theirs. However, on source-based distros, the ebuild/etc might patch the AGPLed software on installation, and if it does that it almost certainly fails to add or update the source offer mechanism as required by the license, making you, the user, responsible for violating it since you initiated the actual modification that is out of compliance.
(I'm only half joking, there is a legitimate distinction here!)
https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/113618913202137970
@marcan from personal experience in dealing with very fine details of software licensing... I think you're applying a mathematical exactness here that does not exist in law. I'm not sure that […]
2024-12-08 chkuendig ┃ edited ┃ 1🔗
@marcan Recently looked at deploying plausible.io/ - an AGPL-licensed Google Analytics alternative. Good luck asking a lawyer if loading (and executing) the tracking scripts constitutes a […]
────
────