[Koha] Proposal To Switch Koha's License to GPLv3 and AGPLv3 or AGPLv3

[Thomas Dukleth]

Aaron Williamson at Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) has reached a
consistent conclusion about the Corresponding Source for AGPL 3.

Our correspondence is quoted further below.  [I had previously posted the
oldest two messages in this set which I include within this message for
continuity.  Messages are copied exactly except for my correction of a
usage mistake in which I have substituted 'automating' for the originally
mistaken use of 'automation'.]

Each of us had to correct an earlier mistake in our analysis to see the
issue clearly.  As I have stated previously, the difficulty is not that
AGPL 3 is new and untested as MJ Ray argues.  The difficulty had been that
AGPL 3 is sufficiently new that SFLC has lacked the familiarity of
experience to already have well thought out answers to some questions
about applying AGPL 3.


1.  SOURCE CODE OBLIGATIONS FOR GPL 2, GPL 3, AND AGPL 3.

The AGPL 3 specific obligations are the obligations to remote network
users of a program under AGPL 3.  All other license obligations under AGPL
3 are obligations common to GPL 3.


1.1.  GPL SOURCE CODE OBLIGATIONS.

I use GPL 3 terminology but the conditions apply equally well to GPL 2.

While the base files for Koha only exist in source code form, for any
conveyance of them outside of AGPL 3 specific obligations where there is
no remote network user, the Corresponding Source is nothing more than
whatever source code has actually been conveyed.  The Corresponding Source
in such a circumstance is as much or as little source code as is conveyed
to the user.  If an incomplete or non-functional version of the code is
conveyed under such a circumstance there is no license obligation to
convey a complete or functional version.

Such a circumstance is the circumstance which we always have now under GPL
2 and would always have if we would adopt GPL 3 as the license for Koha. 
Such a circumstance is also the circumstance which we would have if we
would adopt AGPL 3 as the license for Koha and the party to whom the
source code would be conveyed would happen not to be a remote network user
of the program.

My previous mistake had been not to take source code only conveyance under
GPL 3 to its logical conclusion.


1.2.  AGPL 3 SOURCE CODE OBLIGATIONS.

The Corresponding Source under AGPL 3 is considered to be object code form
for the purposes of the license obligations when a user uses a program
remotely over the network.  All functional uses of software are object
code form.  Corresponding Source is only source code form when the user is
using a particular version for which he already has the source code.

The significant consequence of the fact that the object code form applies
is that the Corresponding Source in object code form includes unmodified
third party modules.  The license definition of Corresponding Source is
not increasing the scope of the work which constitutes the program.  The
license definition of Corresponding Source merely provides correct
guidance for object code form in conformity with a reasonable and correct
interpretation of how copyright law should be applied to software in
determining the scope of the work.  There is a similar definition of
source code in executable form in GPL 2 section 3.