On 10/06/14 06:51, ChanMaxthon wrote:
I believe it is perfectly fine. RMS himself even *encourage* that.
I think people are missing the point here. Assuming the requestor has used the service, this is a clear violation of clause 13 of the AGPL, and, if allowed would make the AGPL effectively indistinguishable from the GPL, as you could select a fee that was so large that it was unrealistic to exercise the additional rights you gain from the AGPL.
Where you have the option to make an arbitrary charge is for supply of the software when you never obtained a copy of the software in any form from them and never used the service based on that software.
If the site is AGPL compliant, there is no need for someone who is using the service to request anyone to supply the software, as there will be a link providing a free download.
On Jun 10, 2014, at 13:11, ldr ldr <stackoverflowuse...@gmail.com> wrote: Here is an excerpt from the response I received: "Yes, FullContentRSS is an AGPL3 script, you can use and/or modify the script as you want. However you can get the script for $20." Is that congruent with the AGPL3 license?
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
