what defines source code in (A)GPL ?

[Chuck Swiger]

Hi--

[ ...email formatting recovered... ]
On Jul 7, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Harri Saarikoski wrote:
>> The exact phrase "use the GPL software" does not appear in the AGPL, so it's hard to know what you are asking about, but I suspect this is the relevant section:
>> 
>> "10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.
>> 
>> Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.
> 
> This section and your point thereto seems to address the earlier, already covered question.  Naturally, if you tweak the code and sell it, you are subject to copyleft as specified in GPL.

You don't have to sell anything, or modify the original program, for the GPL/AGPL terms to apply to derivative works.  If you propagate the program, a modified version of the program, or a work 'based on' the program, the terms of the GPL/AGPL will apply.

> We are ok with that, as well as with any fundamentalism attached to enforcing open source licenses. However, that is not the current question: I have studied the AGPL, religiously I might add.

Software licenses are an intersection of legal terminology, copyright & contract law, and a bit of computer science-- religion doesn't really enter into it.

> I haven't found a section that specifies if copyleft is to be enforced when the modification of the AGPL covered work has not required a tweak of its source code, i.e. no new methods, not even a slightest tweak of existing methods.  As it is objectively only a method of using the AGPL covered software, the only source code required to be distributed is the AGPL covered software, not my method of using the methods in that library.

Try re-reading section 0, "Definitions".

For the sake of example, if you were to compile a program using your code which calls GPL/AGPL code, and release that to the outside world, then the terms of the AGPL would apply to that work as a whole, including the part you wrote-- you would be obliged to provide the source code for everything used to build that executable (except for "System Libraries" and such noted in section 1), you would be conveying a "non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of its contributor version....", and so forth.

On the other hand, if you create a truly independent work which stands alone, then merely including it with GPL/AGPL licensed work(s) does not form a derivative work, and the terms of the GPL/AGPL would not apply to that independent work-- see the discussion of "aggregate" in section 5.

If that is not sufficiently clear, then you should probably seek legal advice from a person qualified to provide it, ie, your lawyer....

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck