Currently all our opensource projects are licensed using the AGPL License.
A copy of the AGPL license can be found Here
Why AGPL? Why not a business friendly opensource license like Apache?
Let's start with saying that we are fans of big fans of business friendly licenses like Apache or MIT. We sincerely WANT
to release our software under one of these license, typically Apache. At the same time, we chose GPL for the reason mentioned in the next para.
The initial codebase of all the
products of this opensource suite and the developers for the projects have been contributed by
Qantom. Even though it is an opensource initiative and the code would grow based on community
support, during the initial days, the project has to be funded by Qantom. That being said,
when the community downloads and uses any of these code, we expect that the project benefits
in any one of the following ways:
When anybody uses the code and makes changes to the code,
these modifications are submitted back into the opensource suite (AGPL
mandates that this be done). This ensures that the codebase grows in strength.
If somebody wants to use the codebase for commercial purposes and extend upon it; and at the same time
doesn't want to relinquish their own code modifications into the open source community, then the entity has
to opt for the commercial licensing from Qantom. The revenue from this licensing will
help us to continue funding the projects.
Eventaully our desire is to convert this license into a more business friendly opensource license like
Apache License. For this to happen, ThingsPing® should be able to financially sustain itself - either by
means of donations, sponsorship or some other revenue generation. Until then, we will have to live with AGPL3 License.