Which license would Anytype choose to open source your code?

Any Discussion
1

Will Anytype choose to open source all your source code, or part of it?
If all code has been opened source, maybe other company will using your product to make profit, is it a problem?

Similar question but without answer : Anytime code and license .

2 Likes
2

See here: Telegram: Contact @anytype

2 Likes
3

We’ll be releasing our protocols as open source with a permissive license, enabling anyone to review the code and make modifications with minimal restrictions.
Our applications, on the other hand, will be distributed with a source-available license. While anyone can review and modify the code, certain commercial uses will require specific permission or license.
We believe that this approach will promote transparency and freedom for the community, while also enabling contributors to create a sustainable ecosystem around our code.

4 Likes
4

Thanks, your reply is very clear. I am interested in this issue partly because I am an early user of Anytype and partly because I am an open source project developer. I am working in a company which maintained an open source project of big data, and our strategy is to open source the CORE of our commercial edition with apache license v2 using two Github repositories(one private and another public).

Choosing an appropriate license is very important, both for external contributor participation and oversight, and also to protect the operations and business interests of commercial companies. After a brief search, I feel that your communication protocol code may be suitable for the Apache License v2 License, but the Anytype master code may be more suitable for something like the Elastic License (Elastic License 2.0 | Elastic).

1 Like
5

This implies a few things that don’t feel correct to me. First, there are very large very sustainable projects that are fully free/libre (open source), and license changes to source-available tend to drive people towards those ecosystems.

Also, open source does not necessarily mean that others can leech off of your work and not contribute back unless you use a permissive license as you have for the server. AGPL would ensure any commercial adopters have to share their improvements back with you, even for companies who don’t distribute the software but simply host it on their servers.

Clinging to an open core model I think will undercut the project long term. There are very successful projects like https://element.io/ which would never have gained the traction they have while trying to maintain a monopoly on such critical codebases as all the clients.

6

Hello @kxra, thank you for your concerns.

It’s possible that applications license will be change in the future, when project becomes sustainable.

AGPL doesn’t restrict commercial use; hence, it doesn’t protect against possible abuse by competitors.

We don’t see the current license framework as monopoly at all: all protocols are under MIT, all applications are available for non-commercial use, modifications and distribution. And the license itself is governed by a non-profit Swiss association.

You can find more information, including answers to these and other questions, in our legal FAQ: https://legal.any.coop/

1 Like