What's wrong with the AGPL?

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


_______________________________________________
The opinions expressed in this email are those of the sender and not necessarily those of the Open Source Initiative. Official statements by the Open Source Initiative will be sent from an opensource.org email address.

License-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org