Deuxfleurs/garage

Fork 73

License restrictions #840

New issue

Closed

opened 2024-07-15 19:54:56 +00:00 by novoseletskiyserhiy · 4 comments

novoseletskiyserhiy commented

2024-07-15 19:54:56 +00:00

As this project is under AGPLv3 license is there are any commercial usage limitations if I want to use garage as is?

Our company doesn’t provide s3 as service, we just want to use it as backend to store files. User only directly will communicate with garage to download object as image or video.

We are looking for self hosted s3 solution and I already know that minio has this kind of limitations and requires commercial license which is super expensive so we are looking for other s3 solutions.
Thanks

As this project is under AGPLv3 license is there are any commercial usage limitations if I want to use garage as is? Our company doesn’t provide s3 as service, we just want to use it as backend to store files. User only directly will communicate with garage to download object as image or video. We are looking for self hosted s3 solution and I already know that minio has this kind of limitations and requires commercial license which is super expensive so we are looking for other s3 solutions. Thanks

morsik commented

2024-07-17 12:31:20 +00:00

As per https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html:

if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there.

So you're free to use this in your commercial environment. But you must publish changes you've made to software under AGPL.

As per https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html: > if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there. So you're free to use this in your commercial environment. But you must publish changes you've made to software under AGPL.

novoseletskiyserhiy commented

2024-07-17 21:04:27 +00:00

Author

As per https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html:

if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there.

So you're free to use this in your commercial environment. But you must publish changes you've made to software under AGPL.

Do you mean if I any changes in Garage codebase. If I use binary as is with no modifications I can freely use it without any publication of source code which is using Garage’s API

> As per https://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-affero-gpl.html: > > > if you run a modified program on a server and let other users communicate with it there, your server must also allow them to download the source code corresponding to the modified version running there. > > So you're free to use this in your commercial environment. But you must publish changes you've made to software under AGPL. Do you mean if I any changes in Garage codebase. If I use binary as is with no modifications I can freely use it without any publication of source code which is using Garage’s API

maximilien commented

2024-07-22 09:24:49 +00:00

Owner

This is NOT a legal advice. However, if you get the legal advice from your company to NOT use garage because of its licence, please reach out to us by email or on matrix, we are interested to hear why and what we can do to help.

The garage core maintainers believes that the AGPLv3 spirit allow using garage alongside other software, as long as those software exists independently of garage. If garage could be replaced in your software by another solution, it is a good indicator that the resulting program is an aggregate of independent works and not subject to the licence restriction.

a software using garage simply as a storage backend would be independent of garage itself and not subject to restrictions
a software building a management interface specific to garage on top of it could be considered bound to the licence, as this work is would not be independent from the software

Here's the related section of the licence:

(5) A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an "aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate.

...as long as the code is not modified or - if it is - that those modifications are published and advertised as part of the service. This is usually the difficult bit if you don't have a frontend to add a link, but you are free to host your fork on this instance and link it from your product.

(6) d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.

AGPLv3 was chosen for garage to ensure that this software, that was essentially funded by public taxes though the European Union NGI grant, benefit most people as long as they are ready to contribute back to the community their changes and improvements.

_This is NOT a legal advice. However, if you get the legal advice from your company to NOT use garage because of its licence, please reach out to us by email or on matrix, we are interested to hear why and what we can do to help._ The garage core maintainers believes that the AGPLv3 spirit allow using garage alongside other software, as long as those software exists independently of garage. If garage _could_ be replaced in your software by another solution, it is a good indicator that the resulting program is an _aggregate_ of independent works and not subject to the licence restriction. - a software using garage simply as a storage backend would be independent of garage itself and not subject to restrictions - a software building a management interface specific to garage on top of it could be considered bound to the licence, as this work is would not be independent from the software Here's the related section of the licence: > (5) A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work, and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program, in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an "aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other parts of the aggregate. ...as long as the code is not modified or - if it is - that those modifications are published and advertised as part of the service. This is usually the difficult bit if you don't have a frontend to add a link, but you are free to host your fork on this instance and link it from your product. > (6) d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party) that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements. AGPLv3 was chosen for garage to ensure that this software, that was essentially funded by public taxes though the European Union NGI grant, benefit most people as long as they are ready to contribute back to the community their changes and improvements.

❤️ 1

quentin added the

labels 2024-08-07 09:39:07 +00:00

quentin commented

2024-08-07 09:44:14 +00:00

Owner

If you don't know to what I am referring, I refer this issue as "Google AGPL FUD". This article by Drew Devault summarizes well my position on the subject. And the source of all these questions is Google's AGPL policy - as Google commits the source code of all its dependencies in a monorepo and freely patch it.

Closing for now, feel free to continue the discussion here, on matrix at #garage:deuxfleurs.fr and you can reach us by email if needed at garagehq [@] deuxfleurs [dot] fr.

If you read this thread and are a lawyer or connected with FOSS lawyers, we are interested in releasing a public statement that would be trusted by company lawyers explaining why it is safe for companies to use Garage under its AGPL license. On my side, I will try to contact FSFE to have more info. If you don't know to what I am referring, I refer this issue as "Google AGPL FUD". This [article by Drew Devault](https://drewdevault.com/2020/07/27/Anti-AGPL-propaganda.html) summarizes well my position on the subject. And the source of all these questions is Google's [AGPL policy](https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/using/agpl-policy) - as Google commits the source code of all its dependencies in a monorepo and freely patch it. Closing for now, feel free to continue the discussion here, on matrix at #garage:deuxfleurs.fr and you can reach us by email if needed at garagehq [@] deuxfleurs [dot] fr.

quentin closed this issue

2024-08-07 09:44:15 +00:00