106
Rustdesk Server Pro allegedly violates AGPL license by not distributing source (github.com)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/opensource@programming.dev
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The free community version of Rustdesk Server (a competitor to the Teamviewer remote access software) is AGPL licensed.

https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk-server

The paid, proprietary Pro version builds on top of the community edition by adding extra features such as user authentication and a web backend for administration.

There exists a repo for the pro server: https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk-server-pro

But it only contains install scripts and no actual source code of the application.

The github releases page of this repo however, contains the compiled code of the proprietary pro version and is available for anyone to download for free.

Analyzing the disassembly of the pro and open source binaries shows that the pro version is definitely based on the open source version.

The company previously associated with Rustdesk, Purslane Limited of the UK, is no longer in operation since 2023.

The project has no CLA and so the dozens of previous contributors still hold the copyright to their code and have not given permission for it to be used in a proprietary version.

There have been multiple requests for the source code of this pro version, but either there was no response or the issue was closed without comment.

EDIT: The repo owner has completely deleted the issue, here is a screenshot: https://0x0.st/KaqD.png

To me this just proves they know what they're doing is wrong.

all 10 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 16 points 1 year ago

That sucks, because they're one of the only ones supporting Wayland, and I don't like using software from shady companies...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Isn't the dev behind rustdesk (at least the original) anonymous? I remember that standing out as a red flag for me when I was evaluating options, and ended up going with Mesh Central instead (which works much better imo)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 23 points 1 year ago

    That's the most cut and dry example of copy-left license violation imaginable. This would even be a violation of a GPLv2 license. It's like they had zero idea what that license meant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Rustdesk has always been kinda shady

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    the issue's gone now

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I wanted to add this discussion post to the mix because I saw this when reading about the related article

    it seems that Rustdesk server pro is a parent of the non-pro edition of it, so its not that it uses code from the opensourced project, but that the open sourced project uses the code from the closed source project. Meaning that the licensing restriction of doesn't apply to that project as it's actually the original source, and that they made the open sourced project based off that closed source.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Are there other discussions about this on the net? I glanced at r/rust and HN and didn't see anything. For such a blatant violation, I'd expect to see lots of drama and shaming going on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •