A developer is violating the terms of the AGPLv1 by sub-licensing his software under the AGPL. His site is http://www.cmsimple.dk/ and he distributes his software under the AGPL but adds a condition that users must include an advert link to his website in a separate license (also disturbed with the software) which he titles "the cmsimple license" http://www.cmsimple.dk/?Licence:CMSimple_licence . He claims that section 2d of the agpl allows this but 2d of the AGPL only requires that people using the software provide a facility to download the original source code and does not allow additional licensing terms that are not covered under the AGPL. He writes:
"This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the Affero General Public License (AGPL) as published by Affero, Inc. version 1. All files in the CMSimple distribution (except language files other than English and Danish) are covered by this licence.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: As covered by the AGPL Section 2(d), the "Powered by CMSimple"-link to cmsimple.dk must under no circumstances be removed from pages generated by this program (except in print facility). If you want to remove or hide this link from your pages, you must purchase CMSimple under a commercial licence. The required link must be static, visible and readable. This also applies testing purposes and setup at an intranet or internal network."
However, his statement is not correct. 2d does not require a link to a specific URL for users to download the source code.
It seems to me that users are still given the protections of the AGPL because section 4 states:
"4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance"
What can be done about this?
Alex
On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 11:00 -0500, Alexander Plank wrote:
What can be done about this?
Write to him and ask him to change the license.
Point out that by his interpretation of the AGPL, if someone modifies their copy of the software users will arguably not have access to those modifications, since the link will point to the original site not the new source.
Cheers,
Alex.
Hi Alexander
Alexander Plank wrote:
A developer is violating the terms of the AGPLv1 by sub-licensing his software under the AGPL. His site is http://www.cmsimple.dk/ and he distributes his software under the AGPL but adds a condition that users must include an advert link to his website in a separate license (also disturbed with the software) which he titles "the cmsimple license" http://www.cmsimple.dk/?Licence:CMSimple_licence . He claims that section 2d of the agpl allows this but 2d of the AGPL only requires that people using the software provide a facility to download the original source code and does not allow additional licensing terms that are not covered under the AGPL.
<snip>
What can be done about this?
I have forwarded your concerns to FSF's licensing lab for consideration and comment.
Regards
Shane