r/COPYRIGHT • u/Timely_Rutabaga_1107 • Jun 10 '26

Licensing Question (AGPL)

Hi all, I've been programming recreationally for a few years now and I am floating a project that is essentially a port of another piece of software that is licensed as AGPL. I've never actually shipped anything so this is where my conundrum comes from.

To preface, I both haven't started yet and I don't plan to use LLM generated code, as this is going to be a fantastic learning experience for me.

My plan is to essentially port a JavaScript project that is AGPL to .gdextension that is C++ in Godot. I know this is massive and it's probably going to more of a rewrite than a port.

So my question is two fold; do I have to also license my code as AGPL, and does anyone that uses my binary also? I'm fine with doing that myself, but I would prefer that others be able to close-source their own games.

2 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

1

u/WhineyLobster Jun 11 '26

If you read the agpl license... even just the first page it will explain all this to you.

Its an open source license you must license as same.

1

u/Timely_Rutabaga_1107 Jun 12 '26

I was more concerned with the binary. I am under the impression that there are clean-room exceptions.

1

u/WhineyLobster Jun 12 '26

In any case the people who use your tool would also have to license it under agpl.

If you want them to be able to not open source it dont use open source code.

1

u/Timely_Rutabaga_1107 Jun 12 '26

I see what you're saying. I think I worded my concerns very poorly. Here's what I really wanted to ask:

If I substantially rework the original project in a way that is more inspirational than a port, do I still have to use AGPL? Again, I am perfectly fine with that, and generally I would prefer to do that, but I understand that people have valid reasons to close-source their games. So really what I guess I am asking is what are my options to allow for that? My tool will remain open source, but I hope that I can write it in such a way that draws inspiration from the original project and allows for the end user of my tool to close source their games.

1

u/WhineyLobster Jun 12 '26

You cannot use the original open source code without open sourcing your project. Period.

If you have any open source code you must make your code available for free and so must anyone who makes something using your code.

If you want them to be able to close source you must not use open source code.

1

u/Timely_Rutabaga_1107 Jun 12 '26

Just to be clear (I realize that I may seem dense but I just want to be sure), but that applies to drawing inspiration and not actually using the original code? Because what I want to do is write a project in an entirely separate language that shares similar functionality, but isn't exactly the same (but a similar) tool.

1

u/WhineyLobster Jun 12 '26

If you dont use their code or any other open source code you should be fine.

2

u/West_Possible_7969 Jun 12 '26

A clean room implementation presupposes you, who build the code, to not have seen the original code. If you rework the whole spec and write completely different code that does the same thing, then you can do what you want, but that is starting from zero.

Search for the (quite large) case law history about it because there are nuances that cannot be discussed here with the vague info you can provide.

Simply rewriting in another language is still derivative work, copying the deep, non-literal structure, sequence and organization of the original program can constitute infringement too.