136
submitted 1 year ago by hedge@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] EvilColeslaw@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Mastodon is AGPLv3. That means if you allow someone to communicate with a server, you must offer them the modified source code. Not just when you distribute the modified code like in the GPLv3. So even if they forked Mastodon their code modifications would need to be made available.

However iirc ActivityPub itself is under a more permissive scheme (I think it's predecessor was using the MIT license?) so Meta could use the protocol itself.

[-] RandoCalrandian@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

is AGPLv3

Hey, you’re right!

To get around that they’d have to do something drastic, like getting the owner of the code to change the license in next release, and keep him in an NDA while doing so in order to position themselves when the change happens.

Good thing we’re not seeing that

[-] dan@upvote.au 3 points 1 year ago

getting the owner of the code to change the license in next release

AFAIK, all contributors need to agree in order to change the license of a codebase. If a contributor disagrees, their part of the code has to be rewritten in order to comply.

this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
136 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37702 readers
278 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS