Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I didn't see a mention of which license, and I am too lazy to check, but depending on the open source license the answer is either Yes!, Yes, or Nobody really can do anything about it most of the time(unless you are willing to sue them).


> I am too lazy to check

Literally linked in the article at exactly the words in the quote you're replying to.

They link to this as their proof: https://github.com/coredevices/libpebble3/commit/35853d45cd0...

Yes, this is an attempt to nerd-snipe you into giving a marginally more informed opinion, while also shame you for being too lazy to click a single link, but not too lazy to type an entire comment.


lol didn't mean to come off rude, I just skimmed it and missed it I guess - so the answer in this case is generally no you cannot relicense agpl 3.0 without being an original copyright holder and getting sign offs from all the other holders.

Also generally agpl 3.0 is considered a viral license, so accessing it over a network is considered a form of distribution (which is probably why they dont like it) but relicensing it is just a core "nope" type of thing.

(also dual licensing seems like you're relicensing effectively if the purchaser doesn't have to respect the gpl license, but not as clear to me)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: