Trying to get my head around the implications of the AGPL licensing.
I understand the logic of taking SugarCRM or SuiteCRM as a code base - going into the code base and changing it - and then trying to sell it on as unique - complete non-no.
Using it without attribution - complete no-no.
Where I get really confused is in the definition of changing/modifying code base. Some examples:-
a. I develop an add-on module to SuiteCRM (e.g. social media) - I am using the database structure and API’s - but not changing code base. Is this then legal to sell without requirement to offer as freely available - i.e. like a whole host of plug-ins on Internet
b. I develop a replacement module to SuiteCRM (e.g. campaigns) - I am using the database structure and API’s - but not changing code base, I am supplying a plug-in module. Is this then legal to sell without requirement to offer as freely available - i.e. like a whole host of plug-ins on Internet.
c. I develop a theme to SuiteCRM (e.g. changes all the colours) - I am using the css style sheets - is that changing code base???, I am supplying a new style sheet category and theme. Is this then legal to sell without requirement to offer as freely available - i.e. like a whole host of themes on Internet
d. Does it matter if this is hosted in a private/public cloud or installed on client site??
All of this is in the definition of “modifying the code base”.
I completely understand the original attribute for the SuiteCRM code base - what I don’t understand is the limits of “modifying the code base” - as the whole structure of the application allows plug-in and theme development.
Its perfectly legal to develop third party plugins and themes and then sell them commercially. As far as I understand it, its even legal to sell AGPL licensed code as long as you leave the AGPL licensing in the code.
Thanks for the quick response - and it clarifies a fair bit - but not quite all.
I get that it is possible to “sell on” the developed code - the bit I don’t get is when it crosses into the “modified code” bit - which must be made available as open source to clients.
Surely the AGPL license means if you incorporate the original code then this must is defined as “modifying” the code - and thus be made available as free open source??
I’m not a lawyer, views here are my own, read at your own risk etc.
As you’ve alluded to. Direct changes and modifications to SuiteCRM fall under modifications, this even includes linking to a SuiteCRM class or file.
For plugins, I’m actually not sure if this would bind you to the AGPL. I think (and remember I’m not a lawyer). That since you are only distributing the plugin itself you would not need to licence the plugin as AGPL but you would need to ask someone more familiar with copyright law.
If you were running an instance with custom modules or distributing SuiteCRM with custom modules then those modules would also need to be AGPL licensed.
OK, just to poke at this a little more can you clarify b. below - I create a custom “Campaign” module and I then use that module in a SaaS. Do I then have to give/distribute the "Campaign module as well to anyone that requests it?
What if I modify the app through the administrator, I rename some Accounts fields and add some custom fields (again through the administrator) throw that into a SaaS do I have to then distribute it?