Choose the Albumentations License for What You Actually Do

Check These Facts First
The Two Package Lines Have Different Licenses
What the AGPL Text Actually Distinguishes
- Do not replace "covered work" with "your entire project"
Common Scenarios
Model Weights and Predictions Are Not Automatically Covered
What a Commercial License Does
Questions to Send With a Commercial Inquiry
Short Answers

Start with the package and the actions in your system. Words such as "commercial," "proprietary," "internal," and "production" do not decide the answer by themselves.

Starting with 2.3.2, the maintained albumentationsx package is available from its public repository under AGPL-3.0-only, or under separate commercial terms agreed with Albumentations.
The legacy albumentations package remains available under MIT. Version 2.0.8 was its last release; it is archived and does not receive new fixes or features.

This page is a practical map to the license text, not legal advice. If the answer affects a product launch, distribution agreement, acquisition, or other material decision, review the exact facts and terms with your own adviser.

Check These Facts First

Before choosing a license path, write down:

Which package and version do you use: albumentations or albumentationsx?
Do you run AlbumentationsX unchanged, or have you modified its source?
Does every copy stay within one legal entity?
Do customers, contractors, affiliates, subsidiaries, or other parties receive a copy?
Do remote users interact with a modified version through a web, API, or other network interface?
Is AlbumentationsX shipped as part of an application, SDK, container, appliance, or on-premises deployment?
What leaves the system: code, a package, an image, model weights, or predictions?

These facts are more useful than a label such as "internal ML pipeline."

The Two Package Lines Have Different Licenses

Package	Maintenance status	License path	Practical tradeoff
`albumentations==2.0.8`	Archived	MIT	You may keep using or fork the frozen MIT version, but it receives no new fixes, compatibility work, or features.
`albumentationsx>=2.3.2`	Maintained	AGPL-3.0-only or separately agreed commercial terms	You get current development and choose the permission set that fits the actions in your system.

The timeline is separate from the long history of the legacy project:

2025-05-27: albumentations 2.0.8 was released under MIT.
2025-06-19: the AlbumentationsX repository began with its initial import under the new licensing model.
2025-06-25: the new repository and licensing model were announced.
July 2025: the legacy repository was archived. Its MIT code and PyPI releases remained available.

Install the maintained package with pip install albumentationsx. Existing Python imports continue to use import albumentations as A, but you should still run your own tests when migrating.

What the AGPL Text Actually Distinguishes

The controlling source is the AlbumentationsX LICENSE. The open-source option is GNU Affero General Public License version 3 only (AGPL-3.0-only), not an automatic choice of later versions.

This identifier is prospective from AlbumentationsX 2.3.2. Published tags 2.1.3 through 2.3.1 declared AGPL-3.0-or-later in their package metadata; those releases keep the permissions that accompanied them. Version 2.3.1 is not republished with different metadata.

The official GNU AGPL text distinguishes several actions:

Run an unmodified program. Section 2 expressly permits running the unmodified Program.
Make and run private copies. Section 2 permits making, running, and propagating covered works that you do not convey, subject to the license remaining in force.
Convey copies. Sections 4 through 6 set conditions for giving other parties source or object-code copies.
Convey a modified work. Section 5 applies to a work based on the Program. Its whole-work rule applies to that covered work; the same section separately recognizes aggregates of independent works.
Let remote users interact with a modified version. Section 13 requires a modified version that supports such interaction to offer those users its Corresponding Source.
Produce output. Section 2 says output is covered only when the output itself constitutes a covered work.

The AGPL is an open-source license, not a noncommercial license. A company can use AGPL software, and a person can charge for copies, provided the applicable terms are met. Conversely, an academic, personal, or nonprofit label does not create an exception from the license.

Do not replace "covered work" with "your entire project"

The license uses defined terms such as "Program," "covered work," "work based on the Program," "Corresponding Source," "convey," and "aggregate." It does not say that every file in a repository, every service in an account, or every application in a company automatically becomes AGPL because one Python module imports AlbumentationsX.

The boundary can still matter. If software is modified, linked, combined, packaged, or distributed together, you need to determine what is a covered or combined work and what remains separate. The answer depends on the architecture, the way components communicate, what recipients receive, and applicable copyright law. A license label on the rest of the repository does not resolve that analysis by itself.

Common Scenarios

The table identifies the first clause and the missing facts. It does not give a universal legal conclusion.

Scenario	Start with	Facts that can change the analysis	What commercial terms can address
Unmodified AlbumentationsX runs only inside one legal entity	Section 2 expressly permits running the unmodified Program. "Proprietary" or "internal" alone is not an AGPL trigger.	Whether any copy leaves the entity; whether the library is actually unmodified; whether another entity operates it.	Contracted permission and documentation for a defined entity, project, and term when the organization does not want to rely on AGPL.
A company modifies AlbumentationsX and uses it privately	Section 2 permits covered works that are not conveyed.	Whether users interact with the modified version over a network; whether copies reach another entity; what counts as the modified version.	Permission to keep agreed modifications private within the licensed scope, if the signed terms say so.
A proprietary Python pipeline imports unmodified AlbumentationsX	There is no Python-specific sentence in the AGPL that says an import automatically licenses every repository file.	Whether anything is conveyed; whether the components form one covered or combined work; packaging, process boundaries, and communication between components.	Express permission for the named application or deployment without relying on the AGPL analysis for that scope.
Users interact with a modified version through web or API	Section 13 addresses remote network interaction with a modified version.	Who the users are; whether AlbumentationsX was modified; whether the version supports the interaction; the scope of Corresponding Source.	Permission to operate the covered service without the AGPL source offer, if included in the signed scope.
AlbumentationsX is delivered in a product, SDK, container, appliance, or on-premises installation	Giving a customer a copy is the kind of event addressed by the conveyance provisions in sections 4 through 6.	Source versus object form; modifications; whether components form a covered work or an aggregate; installation information for a User Product.	Distribution rights for the named product, versions, customers, and deployment model.
AlbumentationsX is used for training; customers receive only weights or predictions	Section 2 does not automatically apply the software license to every output.	Whether the output contains protected code or other material from the Program; whether code or a runtime is also delivered; how inference is deployed.	Usually the commercial scope should name the training and deployment software, not assume that weights themselves need a license.
Code is shared with contractors, affiliates, or subsidiaries	Section 2 contains a limited path for parties acting exclusively on your behalf, under your direction and control, with copy restrictions.	Contract terms, direction and control, where copies are kept, and whether an affiliate or subsidiary is a separate legal entity.	Coverage can expressly include named affiliates, contractors, and locations instead of leaving entity scope implicit.
The library is being evaluated before deployment	The AGPL has no separate "evaluation" category; analyze the actions taken during evaluation. Unmodified private execution is expressly permitted by section 2.	Modifications, network access, copies given to third parties, and what happens after evaluation.	A commercial evaluation agreement can define a time-limited test and conversion path if both sides agree.

For additional interpretation from the license steward, see the GNU licenses FAQ. The FAQ is useful context; the license text and the facts of your system remain the primary inputs.

Model Weights and Predictions Are Not Automatically Covered

Using AlbumentationsX to transform training inputs does not, by itself, make model weights, predictions, metrics, or augmented images AGPL. Section 2 ties the output question to whether that output, given its content, is itself a covered work.

Check separately whether you also deliver:

AlbumentationsX source or a modified copy;
a Python environment, container, SDK, or appliance that contains the library;
application code combined with the library;
a service based on a modified version that remote users interact with.

Those software facts can matter even when the weights themselves do not contain library code.

What a Commercial License Does

A commercial license is a separate contract. It can grant alternative permission to use, modify, host, or distribute AlbumentationsX without relying on AGPL for the scope named in that agreement.

The signed agreement controls the result. Check that it names:

the licensed legal entity and any covered affiliates or contractors;
the covered product, project, or model family;
internal, SaaS, customer-facing, SDK, appliance, or on-premises use;
modification and distribution rights;
term, renewal, and any usage or deployment limits;
support or SLA terms, if any.

A commercial license does not automatically cover every affiliate, product, deployment, or third-party dependency. Support is not implied unless the agreement includes it.

Questions to Send With a Commercial Inquiry

To get a scoped answer and quote, include:

the package and version you plan to use;
whether you modify AlbumentationsX;
whether you distribute any copy;
whether remote users interact with a modified version;
the legal entities, products, and deployment model to cover;
whether you need support in addition to license rights.

Send those facts through the commercial licensing page or email [email protected]. Albumentations can explain what its proposed commercial terms cover. Your organization remains responsible for deciding whether the AGPL option fits its facts.

Short Answers

Do I need to pay because my organization is commercial?

Not for that reason alone. You may use the legacy MIT package, comply with AGPL-3.0-only for AlbumentationsX, or enter commercial terms that cover your use. The actions in your system decide which questions matter.

Can I use AlbumentationsX in an MIT, Apache-2.0, or BSD repository?

The repository label alone is not enough to answer. Keeping independent works in one repository is different from conveying a combined work. Examine what is modified, combined, and conveyed. Commercial terms are available if you want express permission for a defined scope rather than relying on that boundary analysis.

Does any web service have to publish its source?

Do not use that shortcut. Section 13 addresses remote interaction with a modified version of the Program. Whether other service code is part of that version or a combined work requires a fact-specific analysis.

Does "internal use" always avoid AGPL obligations?

No universal answer follows from the word "internal." Unmodified execution and non-conveyed private copies are addressed in section 2. A modified version used through a network, copies sent to separate entities, or contractor arrangements introduce additional facts.

Can contributors' code be offered under commercial terms?

Accepted contributions are governed by the Contributor License Agreement that applies to the submission. See the current AlbumentationsX CLA for the actual grant; do not infer contributor permissions from this summary page.