Re: Copyright arrangements for a web project

Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Copyright arrangements for a web project"):
> I am fine with the stated purpose of the AGPLv3, however I do not think the
> actual implementation is compatible with free software.
>
> There have been no official clarification how the AGPLv3 is supposed
> to work in a lot of situation and how it is compatible with the
> plain reading of the license. Without them, I am wary of declaring
> the AGPL a free software license. There is a world of difference
> between the actual text of the AGPLv3 and how it is advertised.

Perhaps I haven't looked in the right places but either I don't see
the same concerns as you do, or I haven't seen them, or I don't think
they're relevant for the project I'm thinking of.[1]

Nevertheless your opinion is interesting to me because I want to know
what people in general think of the AGPL. So if you have concerns
that would apply to such a project, which you think are more clearly
expressed or more relevant to me than those I've already seen, I'd be
interested to know.

FYI the project is a substantial database-backed web application,
whose infrastructure could easily accomodate a copy of its own source
code, and with which users interact via web browsers and email.

> But it is probably not the right venue to discuss the AGPLv3.

Perhaps not. But I don't want to use debian-legal whose focus is
on DFSG compatibility and whose on-list consensus judgements don't
always seem to align with the actual decisions of those responsible
for these judgements within Debian.

Ian.

[1] I found these:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/08/msg00045.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/11/msg00232.html
http://bugs.debian.org/495721
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2003/03/msg00380.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/09/msg00032.html