Re: [OSM-talk] Publishing bot code. GPL or AGPL?

[Safwat Halaby]

Thank you everyone for the very informative replies. I've decided to
use GPLv3. (And I think the difference between it and MIT is negligible
in practice for this particular use case) 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Publishing bot code. GPL or AGPL?

[Kathleen Lu]

Hi Safwat,

I thought about your hypothetical, and if someone was using a personally
modified bot for personal use, the AGPL does not impose different
conditions than GPL ("if you modify the Program, your modified version must
prominently offer all users interacting with it remotely..." doesn't apply
if you have no users other than yourself). You also would, as a practical
matter, have no idea it was happening anyway.

So it does not sound like AGPL would make a difference in the specific
hypothetical you describe.

I also do not think it is a very likely situation to come up. I have a hard
time imagining that someone would modify a GPL OSM bot for public use but
then refuse to share the code. Especially now since so much code is on GH
where it is easier to send a PR to the original or fork into a public repo
than to keep the code private. What would be their motivation? I actually
don't think you need GPL at all, as motivation for the community to help
improve a bot would not change if it were under a permissive license like
MIT.

BTW, there are downsides to AGPL - Notably, the definition of a "covered
work" is vague and some have argued that using AGPL code "to form a larger
program" means that you also have to release the source for any modules you
use with even unmodified AGPL code. This has led to many companies
prohibiting AGPL use entirely, so could decrease use of your bot. Assuming
that you are applying an open source license because you want others to use
it, this would seem to be a negative.

Best,
-Kathleen

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:27 AM Safwat Halaby  wrote:

> I understand that GPLv3 has a loophole in which someone could modify
> your GPL-licensed code, and then run it on a server which offers some
> service. Since a service is being sent over the wire, and not the
> executable itself, then they can keep their modified code private. AGPL
> prevents this loophole.
>
> Does the same logic apply for OSM bots? Would someone using a
> personally modified GPL'ed bot not have to publish it? Should I use
> AGPL instead if I wish to force any bot user to publish the code?
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Publishing bot code. GPL or AGPL?

[James]

You could always release it under Mozilla Public License 2.0 and that
explicitely requires people to offer source code.

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Nicolás Alvarez 
wrote:

> 2017-10-17 13:27 GMT-03:00 Safwat Halaby :
> > I understand that GPLv3 has a loophole in which someone could modify
> > your GPL-licensed code, and then run it on a server which offers some
> > service. Since a service is being sent over the wire, and not the
> > executable itself, then they can keep their modified code private. AGPL
> > prevents this loophole.
> >
> > Does the same logic apply for OSM bots? Would someone using a
> > personally modified GPL'ed bot not have to publish it? Should I use
> > AGPL instead if I wish to force any bot user to publish the code?
>
> If I run a modified bot against the OSM server, that doesn't mean you
> are interacting with my bot over the network, so even with AGPL I'm
> not required to give you the source code.
>
> --
> Nicolás
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
外に遊びに行こう！
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Publishing bot code. GPL or AGPL?

[Nicolás Alvarez]

2017-10-17 13:27 GMT-03:00 Safwat Halaby :
> I understand that GPLv3 has a loophole in which someone could modify
> your GPL-licensed code, and then run it on a server which offers some
> service. Since a service is being sent over the wire, and not the
> executable itself, then they can keep their modified code private. AGPL
> prevents this loophole.
>
> Does the same logic apply for OSM bots? Would someone using a
> personally modified GPL'ed bot not have to publish it? Should I use
> AGPL instead if I wish to force any bot user to publish the code?

If I run a modified bot against the OSM server, that doesn't mean you
are interacting with my bot over the network, so even with AGPL I'm
not required to give you the source code.

-- 
Nicolás

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Publishing bot code. GPL or AGPL?

[Safwat Halaby]

I understand that GPLv3 has a loophole in which someone could modify
your GPL-licensed code, and then run it on a server which offers some
service. Since a service is being sent over the wire, and not the
executable itself, then they can keep their modified code private. AGPL
prevents this loophole.

Does the same logic apply for OSM bots? Would someone using a
personally modified GPL'ed bot not have to publish it? Should I use
AGPL instead if I wish to force any bot user to publish the code?

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk