|
|
|
|
|
|
by anonymous_sorry
971 days ago
|
|
|
I guess this allows them integrate with proprietary code on their back end if necessary, whilst making it hard for a competitor to take their code and undercut them, since most corps with proprietary software to protect won't touch AGPLv3 with a barge pole. Nothing prevents an AGPLv3 fork if OpenSign goes proprietary in future. I'd rather this approach than yet another non-standard Amazon-proof licence. |
|
|
Couldn't they have accomplished that just by asking for GPLv3 instead of AGPLv3? That would let them do so without letting them make the self-hosted version non-free, unlike asking for MIT.
> Nothing prevents an AGPLv3 fork if OpenSign goes proprietary in future.
Yes, but this would be true for almost any FOSS license offered and regardless of what they ask of contributors.
> I'd rather this approach than yet another non-standard Amazon-proof licence.
I very much agree with this.