Re:Why the AGPL is often unenforceable (2015)
by teddyh on Monday August 28, 2023 @11:17AM
(#37295473)
The GPLv3 and associated v3 licenses were all carefully written to be applicable internationally. Using a Europe-specific license is as bad as using a U.S.-specific GPLv2.
Re:Why the AGPL is often unenforceable (2015)
by elkos on Monday August 28, 2023 @02:44PM
(#37298684)
last time i checked several courts in EU tried and enforced the GPLv3 but I might be wrong
Re:Why the AGPL is often unenforceable (2015)
by patemmschmitz on Wednesday August 30, 2023 @09:28AM
(#37321841)
It is a constant policy, from all "FSF-followers-free-software-activists" to try to discourage, on all public discussion forums, the use of the EUPL that is a copyleft license "other than GPL/AGPL". However, the referenced EUPL guidelines explain in full detail why using it is not "bad" or "wrong". The EUPL licence is 3 times shorter than the GPLv3, clearer, multilingual, interoperable and compatible with the GPLs/AGPL.
The FSF "strong copyleft theory" that linking propagates the GPL license was not (and will never be) validated by EU courts.
(Edit: This comment puts it very well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37291970)
For a license similar to AGPL but written with the whole European Union legal frameworks in mind, I'd suggest having a look at The European Union Public Licence (EUPL):
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Public_Licence
* https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/collection/eupl/eupl-guidelines-...
I am european, so I was considering using the EUPL for a new open source project that I'm planning. I'd love to get some comments from HN readers, regarding that choice.