The Europeans want to create their own open-source office suite, to get away from the whims of some US-based proprietary company -- a commendable goal. They are using the OnlyOffice source code as their starting point -- maybe not so commendable. Seems the OnlyOffice folks are not happy over this <https://www.computerworld.com/article/4153893/onlyoffice-accuses-euro-office-of-licensing-violations-suspends-nextcloud-partnership.html>. Trouble is, I don’t see how they can have a point. They license the source code under the AGPL, a licence that I have some qualms about. But nevertheless, people are free to take the code under this licence and do whatever they like with it, subject to the terms of the licence. From the article: OnlyOffice said in blog post that those accessing its code under this license are required to abide by conditions, such as retaining OnlyOffice’s branding and “providing proper attribution to the original technology.” OnlyOffice said that Euro-Office doesn’t meet these conditions, and therefore “any further use of the software is unauthorized and, as such, constitutes an infringement of the copyright holder’s exclusive rights.” The company also claims it was not contacted about the Euro-Office project prior to launch. But open-source licences don’t require any such conditions: there is no need to preserve any such “branding” (in fact, some trademark owners insist that these be removed in any forks), and there is no need to seek additional agreement from the copyright owners before performing actions that are permitted under the licence anyway. Copyright notices must be kept, anyway, but I can’t believe the Europeans were planning on removing those.