Zig under AGPL?

[mnemnion]

There is ample precedent which establishes that licenses may only be granted by the copyright holder. This is not some nuance of this license or that, it is a basic, bedrock principle of copyright law.

@TUSF

whether you want to believe that the new license applies to the entire redistribution, or only the changes you make afterwards

It’s not about what I believe, the law is crystal clear on this subject.

Slapping a new license on a verbatim copy of someone else’s code is legally null and void. Make some changes, and those are yours, so you can license them as you please. But this of course has no effect whatsoever on code to which you do not hold copyright.

There’s nothing ambiguous about this. You are completely wrong.

[TUSF]

@mnemnion

There is ample precedent which establishes that licenses may only be granted by the copyright holder.

And yet companies regularly grant the rights to copyrighted material they do not own the copyright to, to other companies, all the time.

It’s not about what I believe, the law is crystal clear on this subject.

There’s nothing ambiguous about this. You are completely wrong.

Then there is a lot of big media companies and streaming services misusing copyright and the term “license”, I guess?

[Calder-Ty]

This thread has really become off topic. While I don’t like to close a lively discussion, I don’t know what it really has to do with Zig moving to the AGPL, and I don’t know if there is anything new to discuss about that.

[mnemnion]

What needed to be said has been said already. Probably once more often than necessary.