I think it was specifically Amazon not releasing their changes.
Maybe AGPL would cover them and force the release, but if Amazon stuck their heals down it would be an expensive legal fight. My guess is that it was just easier to change the licence used going forward to one that is more explicit and unambiguous about the matter.
It was my understanding that AGPL was supposed to cover this specific type of use, so would also be interested in know if there is a real problem or if the licence change was simply to make the point without needing to go lawyer-to-lawyer with someone in possession of Amazon's resources.
I'd actually be kind of surprised if Amazon did actually use it - most of the big tech companies are allergic to AGPL, and e.g. Google does not allow it to be used at all, even internally.
dspillett|7 years ago
Maybe AGPL would cover them and force the release, but if Amazon stuck their heals down it would be an expensive legal fight. My guess is that it was just easier to change the licence used going forward to one that is more explicit and unambiguous about the matter.
It was my understanding that AGPL was supposed to cover this specific type of use, so would also be interested in know if there is a real problem or if the licence change was simply to make the point without needing to go lawyer-to-lawyer with someone in possession of Amazon's resources.
detaro|7 years ago
marcinzm|7 years ago
MongoDB does not specify, to quote their FAQ on the new license:
>As a result, we have observed organizations, especially the international cloud vendors, begin to test the boundaries of the AGPL license.