SSPL is a free license

Posted Sep 6, 2025 13:15 UTC (Sat) by claudex (subscriber, #92510)
In reply to: SSPL is a free license by immibis
Parent article: Rug pulls, forks, and open-source feudalism

> You can also check the license text itself and verify that it doesn't "discriminate against a field of endeavour". I recommend finding the plain text version, and diffing it against the AGPLv3. They differ only in the name of the license, and one short section.

Yeah, that's the section that is considered the issue to be able to use the software to provide the service. As it requires to publish all code that interact with the software, like monitoring, backup and storage code. That's a big difference with AGPL.

> "Service Source Code" means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available.

SSPL is a free license

Posted Sep 6, 2025 14:15 UTC (Sat) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link] (5 responses)

To quote the SSPL:

"Service Source Code" means the Corresponding Source for the Program or the modified version, and the Corresponding Source for all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service, including, without limitation, management software, user interfaces, application program interfaces, automation software, monitoring software, backup software, storage software and hosting software, all such that a user could run an instance of the service using the Service Source Code you make available.

Oops, you now cannot use a commercial backup system for which you don't have the source code in conjunction with the SSPL-licensed service you're offering. Also does "storage software" incorporate the firmware of your disk drive or not? far from clear just by reading this license, that "without limitation" clause does raise a red flag or three, doesn't it?

Sorry to be blunt, but that kind of overbearing restrictive language is the antithesis of OSS. My conclusion is that anybody who proclaims the SSPL to be "free" either didn't read it or has an agenda. Or both.

SSPL is a free license

Posted Sep 6, 2025 15:09 UTC (Sat) by immibis (subscriber, #105511) [Link] (4 responses)

It's exactly the same principle as not being allowed to link AGPL software to proprietary libraries; they just updated it because software is now typically "linked" by looser mechanisms.

SSPL is a free license

Posted Sep 6, 2025 20:05 UTC (Sat) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (2 responses)

But there is no limiting principle. The phrase "all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service," if taken seriously, could plausibly implicate all sorts of things:

* You run the service on Linux, so you need to provide the Linux kernel under the SSPL.
* You run the service on a virtual machine that somebody else (e.g. AWS or GCP) hosts, so you have to provide the source code for their hypervisor (and possibly other components, further down the stack, that you don't even know about).
* Your engineers use laptops or workstations to develop the service, so you need to provide whatever IDE they are running under the SSPL.
* Oops, one of your engineers installed Vim or Emacs without telling you, now you need to provide Vim or Emacs under the SSPL.
* Your engineers use iPhones and/or Android devices to receive urgent notifications ("pages") when your service fails in production. This is necessary to make the service work reliably, so you need to provide iOS and/or Android under the SSPL.

You will probably say this is a nonsensical overreading. I agree it is nonsensical, but there is nothing in the license which actually *says* as much. That's a problem.

SSPL is a free license

Posted Sep 6, 2025 20:44 UTC (Sat) by bgilbert (subscriber, #4738) [Link] (1 responses)

The old Sun RPC license required that this legend is included on all tape media and as a part of the software program in whole or part.

Probably they meant all tape media with Sun RPC on it, but you never know.

SSPL is a free license

Posted Sep 6, 2025 22:11 UTC (Sat) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link]

That's much more vague and more likely to be interpreted in a limited fashion (contra proferentem). But when the license actually says "all programs that you use to make the Program or modified version available as a service," there's only so much room for interpretation.

SSPL is not a free license

Posted Sep 7, 2025 6:56 UTC (Sun) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link]

Yeah, it's the same principle, much like jumping the bottom three steps on your way down some stairs involves the same motion as jumping off a cliff. That doesn't make the results equivalent in any way, shape or form.

The SSPL doesn't limit its scope; heck it even says so, quite unequivocally. You have the source code to your UEFI bootloader, and the network card's firmware, and your backup software, and all the other stuff the license mentions and/or implies? No? Surprise: (almost) nobody has. Thus de facto nobody can provide networked services using SSPL'd software, thus the license limits what the software may be used for, thus SSPL'd code is not free by, well, basically every definition of Open Source out there.