From my understanding Bambu is playing “who has the bigger pile of money” while others are stepping up and playing “who has the legal right to fork AGPL code?”
I don’t know but that isn’t even the issue the guy took code that was in the Linux slicer and used that. They are saying he not sure what their excuse is but they are doing exactly what the Linux slicer does which is AGPL code. He didn’t reverse engineer anything.
That’s the problem, it cannot be proprietary when based off slic3R. It’s not their property to lock down.
The slicer is not proprietary, but the networking plugin for printer communication is
I don’t know how their plugin work, but wouldn’t AGPL “unproprietary” it?
Yes but unless they get challenged in court, they will continue to do so.
From my understanding Bambu is playing “who has the bigger pile of money” while others are stepping up and playing “who has the legal right to fork AGPL code?”
I don’t know but that isn’t even the issue the guy took code that was in the Linux slicer and used that. They are saying he not sure what their excuse is but they are doing exactly what the Linux slicer does which is AGPL code. He didn’t reverse engineer anything.
What I’m trying to say is AGPL has a clause that if you use AGPL code any code that you add also becomes AGPL and is required to be provided.
They sometimes call it a viral license for that reason.
Its source code is not available so that’s not a thing unfortunately.
deleted by creator