Contributors mailing list archives
Re: Licence of version 9.0 modulesby Jairo Llopis <firstname.lastname@example.org> - 19/09/2016 10:45:21
In any case, there's one interesting topic to consider about GPL licensing: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatCaseIsOutputGPL
There is the example of a videogame. You can have a GPL videogame, but license its assets with a completely different license (images, audio, 3D models...)
Lugaru comes to my mind. It is a game that got open sourced under GPLv2, but its assets got a different license, so you can use the source code to create your own game and sell it, but only if you do that with different assets.
So that means that you can create your customer's full implementation under AGPL, but give a different license to assets (AKA not code) to let no one use them legally and protect your customer's corporative identity and trademarks.
Then the only violation, in worst case where AGPL addons are on top of private ones and the AGPL creator sues you and the judge considers that base modules are not libraries but part of same codebase, you'd have to publish your sources, but still assets would be covered legally by a different license.
I think when most of us care about LGPL is more about being able to have a theme based on some website_* addons that nobody can legally use in their site and create a legal pishing site. After this consideration, I think probably AGPL + private assets license is enough for that.