{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773/events","html_url":"https://github.com/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773","id":133436856,"number":773,"title":"License (GPL)","user":{"login":"aramk","id":574282,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/574282?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk","html_url":"https://github.com/aramk","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aramk/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/labels/question","name":"question","color":"d4c5f9"}],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":9,"created_at":"2016-02-13T14:26:41Z","updated_at":"2016-02-18T19:33:18Z","closed_at":"2016-02-18T19:33:18Z","body":"Hi everyone,\r\nReaction is licensed under GPLv3, which is a copyleft license which differs from Apache2 or MIT primarily in the need to public all source code, even for commercial applications. Considering the library is for ecommerce, is it a reasonable expectation to require these sites to publish their source code publicly? I think some sites would opt to keep their code private, especially if they've heavily modified the framework with their own components and consider it their intellectual property. Has there been any discussion about this in the past? I'm just curious while looking at ecommerce frameworks. Keep up the awesome development!"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/comments/185881619","html_url":"https://github.com/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773#issuecomment-185881619","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/reactioncommerce/reaction/issues/773","id":185881619,"user":{"login":"aaronjudd","id":439959,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/439959?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd","html_url":"https://github.com/aaronjudd","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/aaronjudd/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-02-18T19:33:18Z","updated_at":"2016-02-18T19:33:18Z","body":"I'm aware that some licenses, such as MIT are more permissive. While those more permissive licenses are great for modules and many projects -  It think it's a little less useful for a project that is not meant as a dependency. \r\n\r\nWe did quite a bit of research, and reviewed with our legal team before we added the **GPLv3** license to the project - just to be clear that it wasn't just a random choice from the dropdown on project creation.\r\n\r\nOur goal in choosing GPL is to permit the activities of copying, modifying and distributing the software, which without a license would have otherwise been prohibited under copyright laws.\r\n\r\nWhere the more permissive licenses do not work for us, is that many allow for the **privatization** of Reaction for commercial gain.  \r\n\r\n As we want a healthy community, I can't see any reason we'd encourage privatization - which is where (we as a project) don't get contributions, patches, fixes, etc because their private code cannot be contributed back to the project.  It should be noted, this isn't project being built for free as a hobby - we have investors, a small team, and a vision that we'd like to nurture through open source, but not entirely through Open Source.  We intend to have private commercial packages that are not distributed as open source, and there is nothing that I see in the GPL that would prevent similar models for other companies.\r\n\r\nAnd while we want to encourage distribution and re-use, we also want to promote a healthy focus on Reaction as a community project at the same time as protecting our rights as the intellectual developers of Reaction.\r\n\r\n<u>The GPLv3 does not prevent the commercialization / privatization of packages for Reaction</u>, nor does it prevent you from commercializing Reaction (as a product, service, or otherwise). \r\n\r\nLook, at the end of the day, we're not lawyers.. we want you to use and distribute (and give the community some credit).\r\n\r\nIf you have specific cases you're curious about, shoot us an email at hello@reactioncommerce.com and let's discuss. \r\n"}}