Questions / Concepts GPL. Was: Re: GPL License with clause for Web use?

Sam Liddicott sam at
Fri Nov 30 21:13:50 UTC 2007

MJ Ray wrote:
> simo <simo.sorce at> wrote: [...]
>> I think in some cases it can be very hard, but I guess it all boils down
>> to the authors defining what they consider being the boundaries.
> That would create a lawyerbomb in itself, which isn't really good for
> free software.
> I think it isn't very clear what is a derived work of a GPLv3 source
> code and what is combining a GPLv3 with a clean-room AGPLv3 source
> that just happens to fit well with the GPLv3 one.
I think (at the moment) that the combining is only an exception for the 
purposes of running GPL3 code with AGPL. Any modifications to either 
work fall under existing licenses. GPL3/13 as I presently understand it 
adds a restriction of AGPL when conveyed with AGPL, but does not affect 
the works own license.
>> If I were an AGPL author I would think twice the way I link to GPLv3
>> stuff and err on the GPLv3 side for any glue code.
> That wouldn't achieve the common AGPL author's desire of enforced
> sharing over the network.  (Nor will the AGPL, but they most people
> seem to ignore that...)
> Best wishes,
My current (enlightened?) reading is that GPl3 users who can get the 
AGPL combined source can use derivations of the GPL work (which must be 
GPL licensed) in their GPL work according to the GPL.

So true non-linking/combining mix-derivations of AGPL and GPL3 works 
will be very hard as the licenses are not actually compatible.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Discussion mailing list