News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Square’s terms of service forbid use of AGPL-licensed software in online stores. Parent comment

Re:Square’s terms of service forbid use of AGPL-licensed sof... by saurik on Thursday June 06, 2019 @05:39AM (#20112945)
It removes developer freedoms in order to ensure user freedoms; claiming it is "against freedoms" is like saying the Bill of Rights--which restricts the acts of government--is "against freedom".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Square’s terms of service forbid use of AGPL-licensed sof... by anoncake on Thursday June 06, 2019 @12:00PM (#20115788)
Not just user freedoms, the freedom of other developers too.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Square’s terms of service forbid use of AGPL-licensed sof... by nroah on Thursday June 06, 2019 @06:52AM (#20113264)
It's the opposite thing because there usually are a thousand users for every developer, so you're restricting the freedoms of 1000 people to defend the freedom of 1 person. While there's 1 government official whose freedoms are restricted for every 1000 people (made up numbers but you get the point)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Square’s terms of service forbid use of AGPL-licensed sof... by pmontra on Thursday June 06, 2019 @07:12AM (#20113349)
In this metaphor developer == government official and users == citizens, so you should agree with GP.

Again, AGPL restricts what developers can do with software to let users enjoy more freedom.

Actually I don't care much about that, I just don't want to see companies come and exploit developers work without having to give back anything. So I really favor GPL and AGPL. Then, if somebody prefers BSD and MIT, no hard feelings.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Square’s terms of service forbid use of AGPL-licensed sof... by pritambaral on Thursday June 06, 2019 @07:21AM (#20113409)
Please re-read your parent's point. By your own logic, if no.(users) > no.(devs), then it makes sense to prioritise freedoms(users) > freedoms(devs), which is precisely what the AGPL does.
[ Parent | on HN ]