OnlyOffice

Details

The project is primarily provided under an AGPLv3 license.

The main problem is that the project abuses interpretation of AGPLv3 license, along with copyright, in a way which essentially prevents the ability for the software to be forked and thrive under alternative authorship, which is an essential part of FOSS.

Their license requirements, link from some of their readme files, states the following:

Pursuant to Section 7 § 3(b) of the GNU AGPL you must retain the original ONLYOFFICE logo in the upper left corner of the user interface when distributing the software.

Pursuant to Section 7 § 3(e) we decline to grant you any rights under trademark law for use of our trademarks.

The first statement above is a very stretched view of what Section 7 § 3(b) of the AGPL allows, which exists mainly for allowing attribution & license information to be preserved/known, while it also hinders the possibilities of modification.

The second statement essentially works in tandem with the first, preventing the logo to be used while also requiring it to be displayed. This makes it impossible to be used, at least without gaining alternative/additional permissions from OnlyOffice.

In email to OnlyOffice, their Legal Manager did not appear to see this as an issue while confirming the combination of intended requirements. The full conversation can be read here, but some choice response quotes include:

For organizations looking for more flexibility — including the ability to remove branding — we offer a commercial licensing option.

I understand your concern about potential limitations on forking and branding. However, we share the understanding that open-source licenses like AGPLv3 are designed to foster innovation, modification, and redistribution.

Our approach to dual licensing is intended to strike a balance between these open-source principles and our need to protect the ONLYOFFICE brand, while also offering an option for commercial users who may want to use the software without branding or other restrictions.

There is little information regarding OnlyOffice funding, but it seems like their developers are, or at least were, a subsidiary of the Russian “New Communication Technologies”. Otherwise, it appears the project gains revenue from selling variations of their software, licensing options and from providing their software as a service.