Google owns the copyright, as can be seen in the LICENSE file and headers, but the totality of the project is open source (Apache).
I own https://anagora.org in particular and plan to run it as a public service.
Google owns the copyright, as can be seen in the LICENSE file and headers, but the totality of the project is open source (Apache).
I own https://anagora.org in particular and plan to run it as a public service.
Giant Red Flag
I considered this for a while and I didn't find any downsides. It's open source; can be forked anytime by anyone.
I do this on my free time.
I understand there is often a reaction to seeing "copyright by Google"; but I researched it and it didn't seem to have any consequences of note.
The one thing I know of is that contributors to the project must sign a (one time only) CLA: https://cla.developers.google.com/about/google-individual
I hope this isn't an issue for you; if it is, please reach out -- or consider forking! :)
This isn't the same as the killedbygoogle complaint. I know they kill a lot because they try a lot but social is Google's Moby Dick. They'll jump on it and fuck it up if it takes off.
Fair disclosure I know it's distributed and as such I've got this link up my sleeve
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/05/google-abandons-open-s...
I'm interested in discussing how precisely Google could negatively affect the project -- I currently don't think that's possible, but I might be missing something.
I don't know how they'd mess it up, gut feeling really. I do honestly wish you the best of luck outside of my cynicism!
Google kills social projects they run, but since they don't run this one, I don't see them interfering. Their ownership is just a technicality because of stone age IP law.
What, in your spare time? That seems... restrictive
How would they view working a second job? Does it matter in what field?
https://anagora.org/node/open-source lists all relevant repositories.