The ‘loophole’
Lots of people write frameworks and plugins and libraries intended for use on the Web. A lot of that is FOSS. But, as everybody knows, free software licenses like the GPL lose their “virality” when used for the web, since you’re not giving away any software (which would then force you to make the code available), you’re just providing a service. As long as you don’t give away the software, you can keep your modifications nice and cozy inside your server, without anybody knowing about it, and it’s still all legal.
Less Sharing
Occasionally I’ve made small contributions to such software projects and I might eventually release some of my own. But you know, I like Linus’ tit-for-tat attitude, and I’d like to get back improvements from people who are using my web-related stuff.
Sure, a lot of people contribute back, as you can see on GitHub, even if they don’t have to. Some folks are just that nice. But, and I’m taking a wild guess here, there’s a large hidden part of users who make modifications and don’t give them back simply because it’s extra work making it look nice, maybe conforming to the project’s coding standards, removing private, company-specific stuff, etc., and the employer only cares that it works, not that it’s shared back. So a lot of potential hacking freedom mojo is lost due to time/budget constraints or just pure laziness.
A solution?
Apparently I’m not alone in thinking this, as the FSF wrote the Afferos General Public License (AGPL) specifically to cover this area, which was previously overlooked. Now you have to give back modifications on AGPLed code, whether you give away the code or just provide a service with it over a network. Great! Now I can make a Rails plugin and get back some contributions!
Small problem though: like the GPL, the AGPL is viral, and so the installation of a mere plugin would require the whole app to be open-sourced as well. Fat chance.
The same problem existed in the desktop world, so they came up with the LGPL, which lets you use the library in proprietary software, but forces you to give back changes you made to the library itself. Sadly, there’s no “ALGPL” equivalent for us web folks. So what now? Are we doomed to have our FOSS mojo drained forever into the gutters of licensing loopholes?!
No!
The solution!
While not as good as making an ALGPL, the clever FSF guys put a nice little linking exception in both GPLv3 and AGPLv3, allowing you to use software licensed under any of them together. What does that mean?
It means that now you, application developer, can take my AGPL plugin/library and use it on your app, which is GPL, and give me back only changes you make to my stuff.
Wait a minute! So you’re saying I have to license my code as GPL?! Kind of, yes. But since you don’t give out your code anyway, to the outside world it’s completely unknowable if it is indeed GPL or not. You just stick a LICENSE file in there with the GPL text and that’s it. Nobody has to know about it, and you don’t have to do a thing (and I won’t even check if the file is actually there). For the web, GPL == proprietary.
Sounds convoluted? Nah. It’s actually quite simple. Summarizing:
- Put the GPL text in a hidden file in your web app;
- Install my plugin/library;
- Change it around, make it better;
- Give me the changes.
That’s it. Since other people will also be giving me their improvements, you will also benefit, all of that while keeping your application nice and proprietary. Good, eh?
