[License-discuss] What's wrong with the AGPL?

[Dirk Riehle]

Hello everyone,

I wrote this email three times and discarded it; I simply don't know how 
to ask.

Final try. If I believe various representatives (on Twitter and 
elsewhere) of companies like AWS, they believe they can use AGPL 
licensed code and the copyleft effect is wholly contained/doesn't affect 
their tech stack at all. Those who pushed source-available seem to 
agree; the SSPL was an attempt to a better copyleft license in the eyes 
of their creators, irrespective of this list's conclusion that it was a 
discriminatory license.

Why is that? I look at the definition of "modified code" in the AGPL 
license texts and to me it seems to do the trick (copyleft effect). I 
find the explanation of conveyance to users less clear i.e. how the 
traditional distribution is defined.

Is there any recognized published statement that explains whether the 
AGPL achieves a network copyleft effect as intended or not? And if the 
conclusion is that it doesn't what's the alternative if you want this 
effect?

Thanks for bearing with me.

Dirk

-- 
Confused about open source?
Get clarity through https://bayave.com/training
--
Website: https://dirkriehle.com - Twitter: @dirkriehle
Ph (DE): +49-157-8153-4150 - Ph (US): +1-650-450-8550