• Miaou@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    Probably the reason they’re moving to a Web offering. They could just take down the binary files and be gpl compliant, this whole thing is so stupid

      • lad
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes, but if the code they took is not AGPL then this loophole still applies

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yes, I meant more that AGPL was created to plug this particular loophole. As in, if it was AGPL, they couldn’t do this.

          • lad
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            That’s true

            Although I personally am not a fan of licences this strict, MIT+Apache2.0 seems good enough for me. Of course, that might change with time and precedents like this 😅