Community mailing list archives

Re: access to code under AGPL v3

Akretion, Raphael Valyi
- 01/15/2016 10:54:58
Also, there is another issue: copyrights get mixed in the OCA modules and sometimes between parties with diverging or competing interests. This makes these additional author clauses something complex...

A concrete example: Akretion authored arround 90% of the OCA Brazilian localization (that mean we should also deal with the 10% of contribs). If you run a COCOMO on it you'll see it's worth around a half million USD, nothing like paying a f**king partnership fee right. We made it assuming the licence of Odoo would not change. Doing AGPL code was the most appropriate investment when Odoo was AGPL. Had Odoo been MIT or something else permissive, we would eventually have taken the VC + open core business model or even do something completely different with our energy. But that wasn't the case and frankly I never seen such a radical license change in the history of open source.

Now if Odoo SA allows themselves to do open core. We are okay for retaining compatibility, but we think it would be fair to double license. I mean: if you want to do AGPL open source with no Enterprise proprietary module then you can use the AGPL version of the localization and everything get fine.
But if you want to use an Enterprise license to try twisting the market and exclude the main contributors from it, then you should pay us a fee to use our code. In fact we would wouldn't even care if that fee goes to just Akretion or if it goes to the OCA instead as long as the OCA keeps helping our open source projects. We think it would be better if it goes to the OCA as it's more friendly with the third party contributors. It could also be a way to fund the OCA a bit.

May be few such licenses would be sold but at least big players would not legally be able to invest massively against us using our own work and I think this is essential to make the open source way sustainable. Don't forget, not all countries look like Switzerland or France or Canada where a good deal of SMB decision makers will investigate your Github profile before selecting an Odoo partner. In fact these are rather exceptions... In some other markets SMB have no skill nor interest to customize their ERP and the SaaS will be king and it's a winner take all market, so people are a bit fed up with these licensing jokes...

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Dominique Chabord <> wrote:
Thank you Joel,

can you please be more precise on the point below :

2016-01-15 15:57 GMT+01:00 Joël Grand-Guillaume

> That being said, remember that the following statement represents the
> position of the OCA regarding its code base. Every contributor and developer
> is free to make his/her own opinion and choices regarding his/her own
> contribution and developments.
for sure, but still something is not clear to me :
So, in the case a contributor has a strict reading of AGPL regarding
his personnal work, and doesn't subscribe to the OCA rule you
indicate, then

-Answer A : if he contributes to OCA modules, he has to accept the OCA
interpretation and change his mind
-Answer B : if he contributes to OCA, he can also ask ( to FSF ? ) to
enforce his own interpretation of the license
-Answer C: he should not contribute to OCA and make his own fork of the module.

probably the right answer is D but I don't know.

Post to:

Raphaël Valyi
Founder and consultant
+55 21 3942-2434