GPLv3 License violation (readme)

[raikasdev]

Same thing as in the other repo, you say in readme:
You are not allowed to copy or use this app code to create similar application to distribute it on Google Play or any other store.
while the GPLv3 license allows this completely, but requires the other app to release it's own source code if it is distributed (as it is a copyleft).

[norkator]

Same thing as in the other repo, you say in readme: You are not allowed to copy or use this app code to create similar application to distribute it on Google Play or any other store. while the GPLv3 license allows this completely, but requires the other app to release it's own source code if it is distributed (as it is a copyleft).

So same case here as you said in other repo to maybe use this https://commonsclause.com/

[norkator]

@ristomatti do you want to give your opinion to this? (original story here https://github.com/norkator/open-intelligence/issues/191, how this got started)

[ristomatti]

@raikasdev is obviously correct on this. One of my original intentions when suggesting to open source the project was to allow others to contribute and/or to continue the development in case you lose interest over time. If the repo is saying you cannot publish a clone on Play Store, it will give the wrong signal (given this intention).

I think you'll need to stop for a moment to consider the copyleft nature of GPLv3 -> it means anyone making a clone (with or without a commercial interest) would also have to release it's source. How likely do you think this would be or would it be an actual problem? Nothing would stop you from then copying the possible new features back to your app..

If the idea sounds uncomfortable, then I guess a Commons Clause license with a remark to disallow making use of the code for financial purposes could make sense. I would still suggest considering removing the comment preventing from creating/distributing a similar app as I'm under the impression you're currently not planning to monetize on this app(?).

If going back to the idea of keeping the GPLv3 license (and removing the non-compliant remark), note that you can (to my understanding) change the license later on to something less permissive if you want to. This of course means that all code written before that would still be GPLv3.

[ristomatti]

@norkator Another thing to consider. Let imagine some sad individual would actually decide to create a 1:1 clone and plaster it with ads. How likely would it be to get enough people installing it to make it worthwhile the effort?

Maybe if someone would repurpose the base logic and translate the app to Spanish or Hindi to use on a different market, they could gain money from it. Would you lose anything in this case?

[ristomatti]

@raikasdev BTW this repo you've contributed to https://github.com/Testausserveri/TestausFood is also suffering from a similar issue. It says the code is FOSS but since there's no explicit license, AFAIK this prevents using it as such. 🙂