On Feb 1, 2015, at 7:30 PM, Heitor Faria <heitor AT bacula.com DOT br> wrote:

Dear Bacula Users,

I'll try to express my impartial opinion here, as a lawyer with a little knowledge of intelectual property, hoping that anyone gets mad at me and to settle this. =)

Bacula is licensed by GNU Affero General Public License version 3, witch requires code modifications to be licensed with the same way, even though it doesn't obligate the modifier to publish it.

However, MOST of the code developed by Bacula Enterprise are in the form of Plugins (Vmware, Databases, etc.) and GUI (bweb), that CAN'T be considered derivations / modifications of the original Bacula Source code. In fact anyone can develop those accessories, like Webacula, Reportula, Webmin, etc. Some of them, in fact, use different programming language, so there is no way to contest the legality of those binaries. BE can license those in any way they want.

That's pretty interesting.  Thank you.

There is at least one other fork Bacula which started in a very different fashion; they work with the project and things are very amicable.  This is not widely known.  The problem has not arisen just because there is a fork.