License is GPL incompatible

[hakre]

Please switch to a license that is GPL compatible.

AGPL 3.0+ should come close if you want to enforce copyleft in the cloud.

[wagnert]

Hi,

thanks for adding this issue. We'll check this and change the licence or the tools that make the change necessary.

[wagnert]

Hi, what exactly is the reason for you to have the license changed?

[willkommers]

Hi, we are straight in a process finding the most reasonable license with our attorney-at-law. But we are still open for any suggestions. Thanks for that we will keep it in mind.

[hakre]

@wagnert

Hi, what exactly is the reason for you to have the license changed?

The reason would be GPL compatibility which normally is a common base-point in Free Software Licensing. There are many other licenses that are GPL compatible, I just name AGPL 3.0+ (GNU Affero General Public License version three or later) because I saw the choose of OSL so far which has a similar attribute: strong copyleft even via network usage (closes the ASP Loophole). Naturally there are many other GPL compatible Free Software Licenses you can choose from, it's just what I thought comes close to the intended expression because it's a wish of me, I would not place any requirements on your project as the decision of the license is totally the point of those who write the software or own the copyright.

Arguments and background information what GPL compatibility is about can be found in this wonderful essay:

• http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html

This is the best summary I'd say I can present regarding that license compatibility part.

Next to having GPL compatibility as common point your lawyer - if this is german-based - might also point to you that in the family of GPL licenses we have (and the AGPL is a child of) has been written with a focus on international usage as well. In contrary, OSL has been written by a single US-American lawyer who might not be incompetent at all in his profession, however, I would would not even compare the review it got with the review of the GPL licenses got on international scale and with further iteration in the Legal-Community around and part of the Free Software Community. But that part might be more interesting for your lawyers, I'm just a software developer.

From your own personal perspective(s) I would say - as a Software developer - you need to decide if you want GPL compatibility or not. Your current license is not GPL compatible with the result that you can not bring it together with GPL'ed code. That is because both licenses are with strong copyleft and require - because it's copyleft - to come over the whole code.

This might not be legally totally right because by law you first of all would need to bring this to court for each individual case just to find out what a collection, derivative, modification and what not is, in practice, nobody wants to splinter hair all day long, so this is just a show stopper for most developers.

Please do not understand me opening the issue here that I won't respect your choice of license, I would ever do, it's just feedback from my end as a software developer who might want to use this great peace of software.

It is also great to read that not everything yet is set in stone.

If you have any questions back, just let me know even if you feel text-walled.

[hakre]

Any news on this one?

[kaystrobach]

The license should be LGPL to ensure a wide spreading of this application. Even GPL can be a stopper :(

[wagnert]

Hi all,

after a long discussion about the business model we're focusing actually and legal influences on it, we came to the conclusion that OSL 3.0 will actually be the licese we want and we have to use. We're sorry if this is not what you've expected, but depending on the plans we have, it would be the right license.

Thanks four your understanding
Tim

[kaystrobach]

ok should be lgpl compatible ... https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Software_License +1