On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 15:30 +0000, Sam Liddicott wrote:
And if it is never released or distributed as a patch, but just a
combined modified AGPL work?
AGPL mandates you to distribute the source code.
The code will be *there* and it will *have to be* GPLv3.
Remember each piece maintains it's own license, it is just that you have
to provide the GPLv3 piece as well, but the license for the source code
is GPLv3 not AGPLv3.
This is what I hope is actually the case, and represents what think
fair.
It seems like the AGPL then would prohibit the separation of the
patch from the combined work (which may not be what the license
authors intended)
I don't think this is possible or make sense to me.
As you said, if the patch was AGPL it could not be distributed.
If the patch is not distributed then there is just a modified AGPL
work and if the patch were extracted it would be derived from the
combined AGPL work and so AGPL licensed.
I think you still don't get the fact that the license *do not* apply to
the whole work. It applies to the AGPL pieces only. It's just that you
have to distribute all the pieces, but that does not change any code
license.
I think your explanation of "combine" shows that this is the case.