I agree 100%. I'm personally a huge fan of "copyleft" licenses as they're often referred to. This requires all modifications made for software that is used by the public to also be available to the public which fosters a great community of sharing!Moving ServUO to AGPL would avoid these types of scenarios altogether.
...In the case of GPL (v2 OR v3), code CANNOT be "distributed" under an NDA...
No, that is not able to be done:Ok, you cannot limit the "distribution" in NDA (this is mentioned in FAQ, actually there is nothing about NDA in the license itself).
But, Can you state in NDA that the work will be provided in the GPLv3 exclusive mode? I don't see a problem in this.
I know it's not possible with ServUO/RunUO, because it is GPLv2 I was talking about GPLv3.No, that is not able to be done:
View attachment 21796
The key here is that technically they're incompatible with each other because GPLv3 is more restrictive than GPLv2. That being said, the original owner (ServUO) could re-release it under GPLv3, but as it stands now, ServUO and any modifications made to it fall under GPLv2.
If ServUO would release their work again, I'd recommend AGPL instead of GPLv3, but that's a decision of the original owner
Ah sorry, I misunderstood the question!
For GPLv3, my best understanding is that you'd have a contract + NDA. The nature of having the contract then allows you (or really REQUIRES you) to then have an NDA (or an NDA clause as part of that contract). But you couldn't have "no contract" and just an NDA, if that makes sense?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.