#signal server is now officially closed source, making it de facto a worse-looking telegram.


@danielinux @mmu_man That’s just not how it works.

While I agree that this is sad, something is not closed source just because the code is not public.

@danielinux @mmu_man To be more clear : there’s nothing in the (A)GPL (or any other common FLOSS licence) that requires the code to be public.

The only thing is that the code must be shared with users that ask for it.

@Arcaik @mmu_man

The problem is not just an AGPL violation here, even though the license explicitly requires to show the code if you are providing a service on top of it. According to AGPL-3, if you are using the service you are the user. Good luck anyway submitting such a request to them at this point.

The actual problem is that #signal is no longer willing to publicly share the sources of their server platform, which is what #signalapp users criticized the most about others in the past, #telegram in particular.


@danielinux @Arcaik @mmu_man Not trying or wanting to defend them, but..

There is no AGPL violation there. None.

They never accepted or merged any contributions from outside the company. Thus, they have the original Copyright so they can leave the latest AGPL online and develop their own special version and keep the source all to themselves without violating any law or license. The AGPL don't revoke your own Copyright if you are the original owner. The same applies to GPL, etc.

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 3

Good point @katie!

No #AGPL violation can come from the sole copyright holder.

But this means people do NOT know what code is running on the server side AND that such code is NOT #OpenSource (not to mentions #FreeSoftware)

@danielinux @Arcaik @mmu_man

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!