Firecrawl is open source, but with limits on how you can use it

Firecrawl is a web scraping tool released under the AGPL-3.0 license, which means the source code is publicly available to read and modify. However, AGPL is not a permissive license like MIT or Apache 2.0. If you use Firecrawl in a way that serves other users — including running it as a service on the internet — you must share your modified code with those users. This requirement catches many people off guard because it goes further than typical open source licenses.

The practical result: you can read Firecrawl, study how it works, and run it privately for your own use without sharing anything back. But if you build a product or service that uses Firecrawl and offer it to others, the AGPL requires you to make your changes available to them. This is a legal obligation, not a suggestion.

Key Takeaways

  • Firecrawl uses the AGPL-3.0 license, which allows you to read and modify the code but requires you to share modifications if you offer the tool as a service to others.
  • Private use — running Firecrawl only for yourself or your internal team — does not trigger the sharing requirement.
  • If you modify Firecrawl and then offer it as a web service or SaaS product, you must make your source code available to your users under the same license.
  • Firecrawl also offers a commercial license for situations where AGPL terms do not fit your use case.

What AGPL-3.0 actually requires

The AGPL (Affero General Public License) version 3.0 has one rule that sets it apart from other open source licenses: the network use clause. If someone interacts with your software over a network — meaning they use it through the internet, an API, or any remote connection — and you have modified the original code, you must offer them access to your modified source code.

This matters for Firecrawl because web scraping tools are often deployed as services. If you take Firecrawl, add features to it, and then run it as an API that customers call over the internet, AGPL says you must let those customers see and read your modified code. You do not have to give them the code upfront, but you must offer it to anyone who asks.

The license does not explore if you only use Firecrawl internally. If your company runs Firecrawl on your own servers to scrape data for your own purposes, and you do not offer it to external users, AGPL does not require you to share anything. The trigger is always: are other people using your modified version over a network?

When you need a commercial license instead

Firecrawl's creators offer a commercial license for situations where AGPL does not work for your business. This is common with open source projects that want to remain open but also want to fund development. You pay for the commercial license, and in return you can use Firecrawl without the requirement to share your modifications.

A commercial license makes sense if you plan to build a proprietary service on top of Firecrawl and do not want to open-source your own code. It also makes sense if you are uncertain whether your use case triggers the AGPL requirement and want legal certainty. The cost and terms vary, so you would contact the Firecrawl team directly to discuss your situation.

Many companies choose the commercial route not because AGPL is illegal or unworkable, but because it is simpler to pay once and avoid the complexity of tracking what counts as a "modification" or whether your use counts as "network use." For small projects or internal tools, AGPL is usually fine. For a product you plan to sell, a commercial license removes the ambiguity.

How AGPL differs from other open source licenses

Most popular open source licenses — MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD — let you modify code and use it however you want, including in closed-source commercial products. You just have to keep the original license notice. AGPL is stricter because it assumes that if you are offering software as a service, you are profiting from the original author's work, and they deserve visibility into what you have built.

GPL (the non-Affero version) has a similar requirement, but only if you distribute the software — meaning you give copies to people. AGPL extends this to network use, so even if you never hand anyone a copy of the code, if they use it over the internet, you must offer them the source. This is why AGPL is popular for server-side tools and why it catches people by surprise.

If you are comparing Firecrawl to other web scraping tools, check their licenses. Some use MIT or Apache, which have no sharing requirement. Others use AGPL like Firecrawl. The license you choose affects what you can legally do with the tool later, so it is worth understanding before you build on top of it.

How to check Firecrawl's license yourself

Firecrawl's source code is hosted on GitHub under the username and repository name where the project maintains it. The license file — usually named LICENSE or LICENSE.md — sits in the root directory of the repository. You can read it directly on GitHub without downloading anything. The full text of AGPL-3.0 is also available at opensource.org/licenses/AGPL-3.0.

If you are considering using Firecrawl for a commercial product, read the license file and the commercial licensing section of the project's documentation. Many open source projects include a FAQ or contact information for licensing questions. Firecrawl's documentation should explain how to reach the team if you want to discuss a commercial license or have questions about whether your use case requires one.

What "open source" means in Firecrawl's case

When people say Firecrawl is open source, they mean the code is publicly readable and you can modify it. You are not paying for a closed black box. You can see exactly how it works, find bugs, suggest improvements, and fork it to create your own version. This transparency is valuable whether you use it privately or commercially.

Open source does not mean "free to use however you want." It means the source is open. The license determines what you can actually do with it. Firecrawl's AGPL license is more restrictive than some open source licenses but more permissive than proprietary software. It is a middle ground: the code is visible and modifiable, but with conditions attached if you use it as a service.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I use Firecrawl in my own project without sharing my code?

Yes, if you use it privately or only within your organization. AGPL only requires sharing if you offer Firecrawl (or a modified version) as a service to other people over a network. If you run it on your own servers for your own purposes, you do not have to share anything.

What if I modify Firecrawl slightly and use it internally?

Internal use does not trigger AGPL's sharing requirement, even if you modify the code. The requirement only kicks in if external users access your modified version over a network. If only your team uses it, you are fine.

Does Firecrawl's commercial license cost money?

Yes, commercial licenses typically involve a fee, but the exact cost depends on your use case. Contact the Firecrawl team directly to discuss pricing and terms. For many small projects, the AGPL license is sufficient and costs nothing.

Can I fork Firecrawl and create my own version?

Yes, AGPL allows you to fork the code and create your own version. If you distribute or offer your fork as a service, you must share your modifications under AGPL as well. You cannot take Firecrawl, modify it, and then sell a closed-source version without a commercial license.

Is AGPL the same as GPL?

No. GPL requires sharing if you distribute the software. AGPL requires sharing if people use it over a network, even if you never hand them a copy. AGPL is stricter for server-side and web-based tools because it catches the "software as a service" model that GPL does not.