Fix COPYING to refer to AGPLv3+ about diaspora HOT 11 CLOSED

I'm pretty sure the AGPLv3 specifies compatibility with later AGPLs, but I'll leave this open until we are more sure

from diaspora.

For better or for worse, AGPL does not have a built-in "or later" clause. You need to specify it.
Of course, the existence of this permission is very important for the health of a promising community. It helps lawyers fix the bugs of the license for hackers to work on the code more effectively.

from diaspora.

"find -name COPYING" does not find anything do you mean the file GNU-AGPL-3.0?

from diaspora.

Oops. COPYRIGHT it is.

from diaspora.

I can confirm completely that AGPLv3-or-later doesn't happen automatically, and the code under AGPLv3 in this codebase is, from a licensing perspective, licensed AGPLv3-only. I'm happy to help you relicense it properly if that is your intent. At the moment, only "Diaspora, Inc." has the power to make this change, legally.

from diaspora.

http://www.ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2009/10/16/open-core-shareware.html

from diaspora.

There are people trying to shoot down this whole project based on details like this. One small change completely removes this one from their arsenal.

from diaspora.

This should be fixed, I'll close it tomorrow unless it was insufficient.

from diaspora.

In the exception, it should be 'GNU Affero General Public License' instead of 'GNU General Public License'.

from diaspora.

Thanks osamak, I made that change. Any other mistakes?

from diaspora.

Great. Thank you!
The legal issue is tricky and that's why, as you know, it needs to be done carefully.

@bkuhn is the one who really knows here, but anyway I guess it is probably the safest and the clearest to use the 'official' license notice that is included in the 'How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs' section of the AGPL to refer to diaspora license in the COPYRIGHT file (for example, it clarifies the "at your option" part).

In addition to that, it's probably important to include the full copyright notice of other projects' code (the ones under the X11 license) because the only requirement of these projects is:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

(That's what Firefox does in about:license and Python in http://docs.python.org/license.html)

And finally the header of all files (which now states "version 3 [only]") needs to be changed. The best way to do so according to FSF is "to attach [the full license notice] to the start of each source file to most effectively state the exclusion of warranty".

Thank you again.

from diaspora.