2026-08-03 18:12 UTC
@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org At the risk of pointlessly poking the bear, I truly do not understand your conclusion that the submitter's proposed text constitutes a 'further restriction'. It does not restrict anything.
Replies (1)
-
@bkuhn@fedi.copyleft.org 2026-08-03 18:58
@kevin@mastodon.km6g.us No bear poked! It's a legitimate question. The problem w/ Shao's structure was that it forbid downstream parties from doing what AGPLv3 permits them to do (i.e., request source). To refine my point slightly: either (a) it's a further restriction (which is what I think) or (b) it's a non-operative additional permission, b/c when entity *D* distributes/deploys to *E* & fails to give source, if it really was an "additional permission", *E* can go back to plain AGPLv3 & demand CCS anyway.